“And you… are the Devil’s spawn… evil from the moment of conception!”

Truth be told, I’ve been wanting to see Flowers In The Attic for a lo-o-o-o-ong time, i.e. since it came out in 1987. But my usually loose cinematic morals came to a a yet-to-be-explored grinding halt, and I couldn’t work out the courage to ask any unsuspecting babysitter and/or relative as a companion.

Back to the now - I honestly have no idea how V.C. Andrews’ neo-Gothic saga (that went on and on and on even beyond the grave) was ever deemed a “sure bet” at the box office, given that “incest”, “captivity” and “borderline non-con” were the novel’s biggest draws: much like Valley Of The Dolls, the trailer is built as a collection of money shots (Bible-thumping Grandma! Attack dogs! Blonde ingénue! Child abuse!), while the Ominous Voiceover informs us that, yes, way more oh noes lie ahead. But everything would be revealed as watered-down Andrews, much to the fans’ dismay.

On a lighter note, I suspect that Kristy Swanson’s ubiquitousness in the mid-Eighies could be connected to her passing resemblance to a cheap, discount-ready Barbie doll clone - they sure came in handy when it was time to fool around with experimental hair treatments.

Somebody must own the DVD somewhere. Make me a copy and win my trashy, no-good heart.

Random wisdom from YouTube commentators: “When I first saw the house in the trailer it reminded me of the home described in FITA I’m like! OMGSH FLOWERS IN THE ATTIC BECAME A MOVIE!”

Due to copyright issues, assorted YouTube mishaps and a whole slew of Unintentional Metafuckery, we are able to showcase 1992’s Buffy The Vampire Slayer theatrical trailer, but not the must-be-seen-to-be-believed TV ad which was on the air that summer.

So, go check out this link…

… and then join esteemed web designer Matteo and I in our little chat.

——

M: So. What do you make of it?

V: What do you make of it?

M: I saw the movie, but never tuned in for the show, and I know I’m the only one. In the TV ads Donald Sutherland doesn’t even exist. Were it released now, it would be hyped for months. It came off as just some dumb thing back then, because the Nineties were oh so serious, depressing, as Rourke would say.

V: You get some Sutherland in the theatrical trailer, but not a whole lot of him.

M: True. What you get is a lot of Luke Perry. But his name only pops up at the end. The TV ad goes like, “so, ok, this is just a regular 90210 episode with a couple vampires thrown in”…

M: (and that’s something they must have tried at some point)

M: … while the theatrical trailer is really keen to tell you “no, it’s a legitimate scary movie with Rutger Hauer, look, Donald Sutherland’s wearing a trenchcoat”.

V: Things the trailer is not telling you, part one: in a most bizarre turn of events, Hilary Swank - who plays Buffy’s lead bitch friend - would go on to become both the only Oscar winner ever featured in 90210 and the only Oscar winner to be fired from 90210.

V: Things the trailer is not telling you, part two: David Fucking Arquette turns into a vampire.

M: Is Buffy’s cheerleader outfit an homage to Bruce Lee’s yellow jumpsuit, way before Tarantino did it?

M: Did Rutger Hauer still have a manager at this point or just didn’t care anymore?

V: It went straight to video here. I seem to recall atrocious dubbing being involved.

“Samanthaaaaaaaaaa.”

Sometimes I really wish I had a teaching position. Instead of meting out essays on the nature of good vs. evil, I’d be all like “Wes Craven’s Deadly Friend: Most Misleading Trailer Ever. Discuss”.

Well.

Whoever marketed this didn’t believe in things like fulfilling one’s promises. Nor, for that matter, enticing the moviegoer.  The picture looks as shabby as it actually is, but the slapdash juxtaposition of “what’s that noise?” reaction shots makes it look even more hastily put together. Then again, the whole shebang-a-bang is about capitalizing on Craven’s then growing fan base, which entrusted him to come up with more Elm Street-ish scenarios.

Boy, were they in for a surprise.

The trailer builds up nice girl next door “Samantha” as a sociopathic killer (she’s not), while the Frankenstein premise (she dies, her neighbour replaces her brain with a robot’s) is not mentioned: the infamous death-by-basketball scene, which almost cost the film an “X” rating, was probably too gory and abrupt to be featured here. The result fits nicely in the Brokeback To The Future tradition.

One major exception: the final shot that frames Samantha by the window, with the glass shattering and exploding from within. Now, that’s an audience-grabbing hook.

Kristy Swanson - which, as you may know, doesn’t quite cut it as a Terminatrix with daddy issues - would give the robotic thing another try later on. Go figure.

Socialite and ex blogger Valido saw it back in ‘86. We asked him about it: he said  “I can’t remember much except the death-by-basketball thing… this makes it look like a female-oriented Friday the 13th”, and added:  “Miss U Anne Ramsey.”