War Flowers

The story was good and I feel they tried to do it justice but the acting was poor. The little girl was terrible. Being a born and bred Southerner the fake accents made me cringe but that doesn't stop me from watching Southern themed movies. This just lacked everything: good acting, good directing and emotion equal to the plot. The only redeeming quality is that there is nothing offensive in the move other than the typical violence of Civil War action and it was not particularly graphic-- no bad language, no sex scenes nor nudity. I would love to see this story done by good actors and maybe better directing. I don't recommend it unless you are bored to death and need something to pass 98 minutes of your time.

If you are looking for a CIVIL WAR extravaganza (The Patriot) with all kinds of CGI battle scenes, or an overblown romance (Gone With the Wind), this won't be the movie for you. It is a simple family romance with a Civil War backdrop. I found it touching, especially the little girl, seven year old Melody played by Gabrielle Popa. The cinematography and story are beautifully muted. For whatever reason I got the same feeling from the movie that I do from early Little House on the Prairie episodes.

One or more of the reviews complains that the acting by Cristina Ricci and the little girl Gabrielle Popa was horrible. For the first ten minutes or so I might have agreed but as I became comfortable with movement of the plot I found that I loved Melody's character. She was a smart, strong little girl character and as far away from many of today's glitzy charismatic child stars as can be. I loved her plainness, her questions, and the sadness she felt while hiding the sadness she felt.

Anyway, I have a feeling that if you like family drama/romance and remember Little House on the Prairie fondly, War Flowers will be a soft, enjoyable hour and a half.

For an American civil war drama, then "War Flowers" was not a particularly impressive one. It was every bit as slow and long-dragged as it was uneventful and interesting.

Yeah, harsh words, but truthful words.

And the movie started out so nicely with a good amount of action and confrontation on the battlefield between the Union and Confederate troops. But after that scene it just went steeply downhill fast.

I managed to suffer through just a bit more than one hour through this unfathomably slow-paced movie before I was ready to surrender to either the Confederate or the Union troops, whomever had an available pistol for putting myself out of the misery and ordeal that was "War Flowers".

The story in "War Flowers" is about a southern woman living with her daughter under fairly poor circumstances, as they are waiting for the man of the house to return back from the front lines. When a small skirmish break out where they live, they come to find that a Union soldier has taken refuge in their basement. Wounded but conscious, the man poses no threat and they nurture him back to health.

Right, potentially the storyline could have been interesting, but director Serge Rodnunsky managed to claw onto anything even remotely looking like progress and holding it back in strict reins. This movie was literally taking forever to go from nowhere to nowhere, and it was was quite an ordeal to manage to suffer through an hour of it. And I can honestly say that I am not going to return to "War Flowers" in order to finish the movie and see how it ends. I just couldn't care less about the characters in the movie, nor the storyline itself.

The only actor I knew in this movie was Tom Berenger, and even he seemed to be tired and just wanting to get this over with. "War Flowers" was not his finest moment, not by a long shot.

If you enjoy American civil war movies, then stay well clear of "War Flowers", because it just isn't worth the time or the effort.

I am rating it a meager, but very generous, three out of ten stars.

This film tells the story of a young woman and her daughter living in a farm house, waiting for the man of the house to return from the civil war.

I am rather surprised by how bad "War Flowers" is. The opening battle scene is supposed to be impressive, but it gives me the impression that it is a bad made for TV movie. The story is slow and quite uneventful, maybe it is because they are in a very small town where nothing happens. Then, an enemy soldier arrives and turns things upside down. The romance is so unbelievable and poorly built up, that I find it ridiculous that they would fall for each other. Another poorly constructed storyline is the daughter talking about how the father would come back. And another annoying thing is that people talk so slowly in the film that it doesn't even sound realistic. Poor Christina Ricci, she has starred in more than her fair share of bad movies in recent years. I hope her next film will be better!

Written and directed by Serge Rodnunsky, War Flowers (2012) is a vanity period film staring a surprising cast, including veteran actors Christina Ricci and Tom Berenger. A few charming performances save this otherwise meandering and strange take on American history from being too unbearable to watch, but history buffs will cringe.

Union general McIntire (Tom Berenger) lost two sons at the Battle of Antietam, so when his army invades an unnamed valley in North Carolina in 1863, he tries to send his third son, Louis (Jason Gedrick), back home before the war ends. Eager to get into the fight, Louis disobeys his father but gets wounded and seeks shelter in a farm house.

The house is owned by Sarabeth Ellis (Christina Ricci) and her daughter Melody (Gabrielle Popa), who are waiting for Sarabeth's husband, John (Bren Foster), to return from the war. Sarabeth believes John has been killed, but Melody has faith. Short on food, they're harassed by a local derelict, Rufus (Kurt Yaeger).

As the fortunes of war swirl around their farm, Sarabeth must decide whether to embrace her unwelcome Yankee visitor and perhaps move on with her life, or give up and succumb to the horrors of war. Things look bleak when Louis McIntire is captured by his own men, mistaken for a Confederate, and left in the stockade by his father. Will the two reunite and survive?

There aren't many redeeming qualities in this film, but if I had any praise at all, it would be for Gabrielle Popa's portrayal of seven-year-old Melody. It's a shame that actress hasn't gone on to do more with her career. The back-and-forth between her and Christina Ricci's character is the highlight of this movie. Their dialog borders on anachronistic, but it has a certain charm that saves the viewer from an otherwise lackluster and cliche-ridden script.

War Flowers' two stars, Ricci and Tom Berenger, are not at the height of their abilities. Berenger played Lt. Gen. James Longstreet in my favorite Civil War film Gettysburg (1993), but here both his acting and his physical health seem to have deteriorated. Likewise, Ricci gives it her best effort but there isn't much to work with. This movie was released after her TV show Pan Am (2011-2012) was cancelled, so maybe she had nothing better to do.

On a side note, North Carolina in 1863 is a weird setting for this film. There were only two battles fought in North Carolina that year: Fort Anderson and Washington. Both were Confederate offensives along the coast in the spring. Did the writer do any research for his movie, or did he just pick a southern state and year at random? If you're going to make a historical film, details matter. Grounding a story in real events makes it more compelling and authentic.

War Flowers currently has a 4.2 rating and a 38% audience score on RottenTomatoes, for good reason. Like the more recent Son of a Gun (2019), War Flowers is an amateur effort with a low production value. Despite spending upwards of $5 million, the direction, cinematography, editing, and sound are all embarrassingly poor quality, even for an indie film. Civil War buffs should avoid this amateur effort.