Article first published as PETALS ON THE WIND Review on Seat42F.
This weekend, Lifetime presents PETALS ON THE WIND, a television movie that serves as a sequel to last year’s Flowers in the Attic. It’s been ten years and the Dollanganger children are still trying to escape the secrets of their past. Their family is full of horrors that they haven’t shaken themselves of yet, and as the tale unfolds, they are drawn deeper into the web of incest and betrayal.
I do feel like PETALS ON THE WIND needs more time to really get its message across. The pacing zooms through two years and it bounces between the three characters, never serving any of them enough to make it seem like there’s much depth. We see their actions, but missing are the scenes of self-doubt and struggling with damaged minds. This story has great potential, and perhaps should have been a two-night miniseries, rather than a quick TV movie.
This weekend, Lifetime presents PETALS ON THE WIND, a television movie that serves as a sequel to last year’s Flowers in the Attic. It’s been ten years and the Dollanganger children are still trying to escape the secrets of their past. Their family is full of horrors that they haven’t shaken themselves of yet, and as the tale unfolds, they are drawn deeper into the web of incest and betrayal.
Each of the three surviving siblings
have a large role to play in PETALS ON THE WIND, weaving three separate
stories, even though they remain close, having been taken in by a kindly
old man who has passed away as the film begins. Their current stories
are built off of what came before, personalities shaped by neglect,
abuse, and imprisonment, damaged people who will probably never be whole
again.
All three kids have been recast, which
makes sense, given their age differences in the two productions, while
the adult actors reprise their roles. It’s a little weird at first to
adjust, as there are very few through lines between the two, making the
characters seem like completely different people. Then again, kids
change a lot from teenagers into their twenties or childhood to teens,
so I guess it makes sense that the newbies only bear a passing
resemblance to the old.
The story this time around doesn’t feel
as intense or moving as the first movie. I think a lot of this is
because of the sprawling setting. In Flowers in the Attic, the children
are confined to one place, with tension building over time. This is
effective storytelling, and that element is now removed, the
Dollangangers going out into the world. As such, I don’t feel that
PETALS ON THE WIND is as effective as its predecessor.
That being said, there is a continued
theme of being trapped. While no longer physically imprisoned, none of
the three has been able to find their freedom. They are hemmed in,
emotionally, sexually, and morally, by their mother, Corrine (Heather
Graham), and grandmother, Olivia (Ellen Burstyn), even if they don’t see
them. In this, there is a continuation of arrested development that is
intriguing, even if the overall presentation is more melodramatic and
less compelling.
Near the start, Cathy (Rose McIver, Once
Upon a Time, Masters of Sex) moves to New York with new beau Julian
Marquet (Will Kemp) to become a professional ballerina, only to find a
life much departed from young girls’ fantasies of such. Of course, she
keeps being drawn back to her siblings and her home. Cathy is the one
most like Corrine and Olivia, I believe, which will be seen as the story
plays out. It is up to the individual viewer to judge whether she is
applying the harsh life lessons she learned justly or continuing a cycle
of cruelty. I believe there is a case to be made for both.
Meanwhile, Christopher (Wyatt Nash,
Hollywood Heights) is finishing medical school. His boss, Dr. Reeves
(Nick Searcy, Justified), has a daughter, Sarah (Whitney Hoy, The
Final), who is quite taken with Christopher, a good looking, intelligent
young man. In the Reeves family, Christopher has the chance to leave
his past behind and build a normal existence, with a respectable wife
and kids. Can he get over his illicit feelings for Cathy and do it?
Then there’s Carrie (Bailey Buntain, a
veteran of Bunheads, though she doesn’t play the dancer in this one),
who was too young for personality in Flowers in the Attic, but is now
being tormented at high school and feeling left out of her older
siblings’ bond. She is desperate for attention from just about anyone,
including her mother, and yet, her thread is the least developed of the
three, sadly, as there is something interesting going on here.
I do feel like PETALS ON THE WIND needs more time to really get its message across. The pacing zooms through two years and it bounces between the three characters, never serving any of them enough to make it seem like there’s much depth. We see their actions, but missing are the scenes of self-doubt and struggling with damaged minds. This story has great potential, and perhaps should have been a two-night miniseries, rather than a quick TV movie.
It’s also regrettable that we get so
much less of Graham and Burstyn this time. Burstyn, in particular, is a
great actress, and while she does a lot with the little she’s given, she
doesn’t really have her own plot in the sequel. With limited time, it
makes sense to focus on the next generation, but I’d really like to see
more of Corrine’s continued struggle against Olivia, as well as the
chasm between the two women because of their shared misdeeds.
Overall, PETALS ON THE WIND is
enjoyable, a bit better than most of what I’ve seen from Lifetime, but
several steps below its potential. I don’t know if the network plans to
continue making the other three books in the series, but I kind of hope
so, provided they take steps to better care for the material the next
time around.
PETALS ON THE WIND airs Monday at 9 p. m. ET on Lifetime.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.