Petals on the Wind

I've read this series several times and had my reservations that the film could be as riveting as the novels. And this being the second in the series further made me leery. But it was all for no reason.... all this film was intriguing from start to finish. Heather Grahams role is done so well and really brings a lot to the screen and her character. This is such a sad horrifying story that is sad and compelling as much as it is horrifying. It dares to bring what many feel are taboo or shocking subjects....child abuse.....incest.....romantic triangles....I loved this and am hoping for the third book to be made into a movie. Well done and highly recommended .

Jumping 10 years in this movie wasn't such a great idea. The book is always better as they generally say, but some people do have a hard time reading, so usually a movie is a shortcut, and this movie certainly took too many shortcuts itself!

In the beginning of this very book, it picked up immediately after the first book, Flowers In The Attic, and this production could have done just that, because it leaves out Doctor Sheffield, who was an important part of the story, at least in the beginning, because he took in 3 children who needed the care and help.

The woman who meets Christopher, Cathy and Carrie is deaf in the book, she wasn't in this particular film.

As for the filming, it's filmed great in my opinion, very well acted, but if you really want to know the depth of this continuing saga, read the book after seeing the movie, I guarantee you will love the book much more.

Awesome. I expected a part 2 to not be as good as the first But it was just awesome. They almost could have made 2 movies out of it cuz it moved so quickly- but that's only cuz it made you want more when it was over. Great job by robin lippin Csa.I'm a huge Lizzie McGuire fan. Robin did an AWESOME JOB - the older Cathy looked so much like the younger - when she'd turn her head at times she looked just like the young Cathy in FITA. with a plot of this going on and on you could almost do a mini series or a series - generation after generation--- very well done. Heather graham did so good with that crazed look in her eyes-- the girl who played Carrie was just beautiful. All the actors did a wonderful job- I was just so impressed and I never review movies or put things online about a movie- I just loved it.

It's a good movie & acting was very good as well. If your watching the Flowers in the Attic series it's the second installment so to understand the rest of the series watching is is necessary.

That said one needs to know this movie is very different from the book honestly if you were to take the book or movie and rename the characters one would swear they are not the same at all. The differences between the book and movie are as follows first and foremost the time frame from beginning to end of book was 10 to 15 or more years. The book picked up right where Flowers in the Attic ended then covered 10 - 15 years of their lives. The movie jumps 10 years then crams much of the events of the book (at least the parts it covered) in to a 2 - 3 year time frame giving it a rushed cramed feeling. In the book series Cathy wanted to be a Prima Ballerina and she achieved this, despite the hardships she faced. The movie adaptation only showed her going to New York for a few months she never achieved Prima Ballerina status. These are just two of the more crucial to the series events that were either not covered or skipped. Another important aspect is the hazing of Carrie at school in the book the hazing started immediately and never stopped because the movie jumped 10 years this was not really covered as well. Seeing as how this was a contributing factor into Carrie's decisions it cheapened that aspect of the story in my opinion. Given that the first movie and truth be told the following two movies in the series stayed truer to the books it was a bit of a disappointment that they chose to not stay truer to the book than they did.

That said if your interested in the series and you have never read any of the books my recommendation to fully understand the series is to either read the series or if you don't want to read all the books you could watch the first movie read Petals on the wind book then watch the other two movies.

This TV movie version of the beloved cult novel "Petals On the Wind" from Gothic romance author V.C. Andrews, mostly fails for several reasons. Of course it's biggest flaw is the tele-play adaptation. Somebody had the blind arrogance and stupidity to think they could improve on the source material, by making major alterations. Characters and incidents that are imperative to the story are sloppily chopped out of the script. At the same time, newly invented characters are introduced, pointlessly destroying the arc and the rhythm of the story. For instance, Christopher, who was so tortured by his love for his sister in the novel, suddenly finds time to embark on a shallow romance with a twangy speaking Southern airhead named Sara! Their relationship goes as far as the two becoming engaged. Apparently the writers failed to understand that Chris' unswerving devotion to Cathy, was the most tragically romantic aspect of this whole story. The sexy, and dangerous Russian ballet dancer, Julian is suddenly a whiny, un-intimidating Brit. Why? Why castrate one of the most potent and frightening characters in the book like this? I'm guessing the creators of this shallow soap opera were too lazy to do the research, or at least mimic a Russian accent. And remember how evil and terrifying Olivia was in the novel? Not here; now she is a strict, religious fanatic who still has the ability to show sadness and regret for her cruel treatment of the children in the attic. What the hell were they thinking?

Apparently the creators of this film had no idea about the dedicated cult following that these novels have. They are loved and remembered by millions of fans throughout the world. Sadly, the movie could have had the same effect, if they didn't tamper so unforgivably with the storyline. Admittadly I did like the movie a bit more the second time around. By that time my expectations were lowered enough to watch it without getting angry. It isn't a total waste, as the V.C. Andrews story still manages to shine through all the horrible alterations. At it's heart, we still have that sad, and doomed love that exists between Chris and Cathy. The actors for the most part, look as they are described in the novels. Ellen Burstyn is a fine actress, and the movie comes alive the few times she is on screen. But again, I can't figure out why she is playing the Grandmother with a sympathetic edge. And at least the movie does have a very pretty look to it, as well as some effective romantic music.

But it just isn't enough, for something like this. It's very sad, because with the right screen writer, this thing could have been EPIC. I mean, it's supposed to be an 8 hour production when you put all four movies together. I just wonder why they had to gut and slaughter the source material so much. The third book, "If There Be Thorns" is supposed to be realized into a film next...let's hope they don't try and tweak THAT story. to the creators of this series: Get it right next time..there are people out there that actually care, even if you don't...