Raetsonwe
Redundant and unnecessary.
Exoticalot
People are voting emotionally.
Cleveronix
A different way of telling a story
Falconeer
Once again, Lifetime TV attempts to adapt a novel by the much loved cult author V.C. Andrews. The Dollanganger series was a mixed bag, successful in some ways, but failing when they made alterations to the source material. "My Sweet Audrina" falls victim to the same kind of amateurish "tweaking" of the original story.To be fair, Lifetime didn't have so much to work with, as this novel wasn't really the author's best work, unlike the Dollanganger series, which was a huge success all over the world. This film is successful on some levels, such as the set design and cinematography being really gorgeous, as well as the mostly unknown cast. The house in which the drama takes place is a visual treat that will please fans of Gothic and romantic architecture. I just wish the script had been more like the novel. Yes, it is a rather strange book, and I imagine Lifetime didn't want to gamble on something that would put off their usual audience. So what we get is less of a Gothic horror/mystery, and more of an erotic thriller/soap opera production that Lifetime TV is known to produce. What a shame; the books were immensely popular, and the movie could have garnered more attention if it had been a bit more unique and daring. As it stands, "My Sweet Audrina" is still worth a look as a curiosity piece for fans of the V.C. Andrews books. It's surprising that this weird book was ever made into a movie in the first place.
Ann LS
I have to say that I have loved all the other V.C Andrews books to movies, the Dollanger Series was lovely. When it came to this movie, the lead is beautiful but her acting skills are quiet lacking, she mumbles lines, and I really can't say she had any real chemistry with her male lead. I adored Vera more, which is saying a lot when I read the books, I couldn't stand her.One of my biggest disappointments is Audrina's hair color, in the novel it was described as blond, with many other shades in it. In fact it is a key point in the "First" Audrina's story. Where she say's all girls of her hair color is witches and attempts to "call down a curse" on the boys. So this is a minor cosmetic thing, but its a big one to me. Also Audrina's eyes were suppose to be purple, V.C Andrews wrote her to be Gothic, and I feel that this movie fails to deliver it.By the end of it your just wanting for her to find the truth out so it will end. The story builds but goes no where.
SnoopyStyle
Audrina Adare (Farryn VanHumbeck) lived in isolation with with her father Damian (James Tupper), mother Lucietta, aunt Ellsbeth and cousin Vera (Kacey Rohl) in a mansion. She lived in the shadow of her dead sister namesake. She is confused with time and lost memories. Vera constantly taunts her. Her father pushes a connection with the original Audrina. Arden Lowe is a local boy in love with Audrina. Lucietta dies in childbirth and baby Sylvia is autistic. Years later, Audrina (India Eisley) takes piano lessons from Lamar Rensdale while Vera (Tess Atkins) flirts.This starts off like a moody horror movie. In the end, it's only a spooky mystery. Kacey Rohl should have stayed as Vera. The change in Audrina actresses is acceptable and Arden is inevitable. Rohl could easily play all the different ages. India Eisley has the innocent fragility and beauty for the part. Her speaking voice does mumble her lines sometimes which isn't the greatest for a lead. The middle is a lot of slow rambling sexual melodrama. It's somewhat aimless. It needs a direction and the simplest is Audrina researching her namesake predecessor. By the end, the reveal doesn't satisfy as much as releases the movie from its expectations.
John Doe
I stumbled across this film while watching TV a few weeks ago. The film, "My Sweet Audrina" is based on a novel by Virginia C. Andrews. I watched the movie because I thought India Eisley was a good actress and liked her from a few other projects she was in.The story, (although confusing, and I'll try to explain it as best as I can from what I understood of it) tells the story of a girl named Audrina who, (from what was said in the beginning) is the second Audrina who had a sister before her also named Audrina who died from an accident in the woods (I will not say what, you have to watch the film sorry). The second Audrina wants to be perfect like the first and was isolated from the world, and has a step-sister/second cousin named Vera. Audrina's mother died during child birth to Audrina's sister. (I could be wrong on this so forgive me if I am). Anyways, there are three Audrina's (played by three different actresses in the story, one for three different stages of her life), and one day she falls in love with a boy named Arden.The story is interesting and kind of confusing but is well written and keep your attention span going for 88 minutes.The acting is very well dome from India Eisley, James Tupper and Tess Atkins. I recommend this movie to see once but not much else. I won't spoil any more of the film so just watch it yourself.I give My Sweet Audrina a 6/10
