every great story have it own essence . and when it be strip off that and it become a story that easily you and me or any john doe could write . flower in the attic and write by virginia andrew and be a gripping tale of broken trust and betrayal and and complex human relationship that seem so natural under the circumstance and however forbidden they be to be . it such a pity that such a novel should fall in wrong hand for it screen adaptation . the movie horribly lack the original soul of the story and it sinister twist and it surprise and it adventure in sociology . the story be like this represent after their father die accidentally and corrine and the mother and take pre pubertal chris and cathy and little twin cory and carrie to her own wealthy parent hop she would inherit from his die father . but there a catch while her marriage have be earlier disapprove by the old man and he would not let her a penny if he find out she have child . so she and the equally cruel grandmother lock the kid up in the attic . until the fine moment come when she would win the old man heart back and tell her everything . but that day never come while corrine herself marry another man and eventually inherit the money . without tell her father about the child . in the meantime and chris and cathy grow up through teen and discover each other quite fruitfully and and eventually all four of them become a family and share a special bond make out of the feeling of be betray and and the longing to escape and which occur not before three year . the movie change a lot of it . some i do not mind and but some be really outrageous . the account of mental and physical growth of the child during the course of time be largely leave out . the movie show chris and cathy in late teen right from the start and which ruin the basic message behind their relationship . in the book the twin play an enormous role in build up that relationship between their old sibling . the movie do not treat them a character and to put it flatly . and how the movie end and it may look dramatic in a rather happy end manner and but compare to the book and it be overtly exaggerated and give the whole thing a cheap smell . the book climax be not dramatic and yet far more thrilling than this crap about the kid meet their new stepfather . and finally this sick hush hush about the incest . somebody who like the movie consider the brilliant plot of the novel just an excuse to write about incest and and tell me it good how the movie avoid the detail . nonsense . incest in this story come a the most natural thing on earth . and how wonderfully indifferent andrew be when she write about it and the storyteller be cathy . the movie blandly leave a large part of it out and make the whole movie seem and well and infertile . for the casting and only louis fletcher make a great grandmother . she be right there in her oscar win standard . but besides her and it all a bad casting throughout . kristy swanson a cathy be just disgust . how can she act so blunt when she the central character . jeb adam a chris may not look like he describe and but he act not that bad . and victoria tennant a corrine too and receive little screen time to be judge well . i wish there hadn not be a movie . you can not make an art movie through three year and and you can not easily show a 13 year old girl naked perform incest and both of which be absolutely necessary to make a good screen adaptation out of the story . but i do not want this crap to be remember a the only movie out of andrew novel . i now want a remake and however controversial it may be and whatever rating it may get .