Hollywoodshack I haven't seen this film in a while and was somewhat sickened by a scene where the boy, played by Lucas Haas. was fondling Rose's genitals. It's strange how everyone romanticized this. Now that he's grown up, he loves the sweet memories of early blooming manhood. But what if the sexes were reversed? What if the family had a butler named Ross and a young girl wanted to fondle his genitals? I doubt if we'd have such a warmly accepted film or any chance of making a mainstream movie about it at all.

moonspinner55 Screenwriter Calder Willingham adapted his own book about a wayward young woman in 1930s Georgia who comes to stay with a rural family, quickly setting her lustful sights on the family patriarch. Director Martha Coolidge isn't especially graceful here, moving the film along in fits and starts, and when it becomes apparent that there isn't much to the story beyond the central situation, it just becomes a chore. The writing is decidedly bland, opening with a woeful prologue, and one never gets a sense of character development or transition. Real-life mother and daughter Diane Ladd and Laura Dern each earned Oscar nominations for their work (an Academy first), but young Lukas Haas (standing in, perhaps, for Willingham) gives the most interesting performance as the teenager with a crush on his family's flirtatious houseguest. ** from ****

jaymaloney First of all, I gave it an 8 out of ten. The acting was really quite wonderful all around, and Laura Dern can absolutely steam up a room. Her Rose was always sweet and always on a sexual hair-trigger. She was a bit dim-witted, but always quite endearing.And even this warm, feel-good, sweetheart of a film made me think...So here's the question: If a young adult woman gets into bed with a thirteen year-old boy, and then allows him to fondle her to orgasm, does that make her a criminal? In this day and age, the answer's yes. But every person commenting on the film (rightfully) loves Rose, and loves her motives.and consider this: Would there ever be a film where a young adult male gets into bed with a thirteen year-old girl, and where one or the other fondles the other to orgasm, and the film goes on to develop that adult male into a sympathetic character? The answer is No. Such a film produced in the 1930s or today, would have had the perp rightfully jailed or rightfully shot.Now,it seems to me, that while Rose today would go to jail, in more sensible times Rose would not be a sexual offender. In fact, I figure that the boy would be universally recognized as one really lucky fellow. But our current social norms would see poor steamy Rose placed under arrest.In today's wacky, feminized legal system (in which ideology must regard males and females as always the same, all the time), Rose would have to be regarded as a criminal, simply because any male who had a sexual relationship with a minor female is a criminal --and rightfully so.In this wacky, feminized time, we read all about fabulously gorgeous 20-something high school teachers who get arrested for having sex with under-age boys. A generation ago, what would have been a boy's fantasy come true, is now portrayed as a boy's nightmare. Talk about screwing around with a kid's head!Is there anything at all about 1932's Buddy that is so different from young teenage boys of today? If not, how can the encounter between Buddy and Rose be so okay in the eyes of every commentator (and in my eyes, too, by the way), while similar encounters today between 14-15 year-old boys and 30 year-old women is now called a "crime"? What am I missing here?

lilybear5923 I loved this movie. In updating my VHS collection to DVD I bought it a second time and was so glad that I did. I love the music score and the soft period lighting it provides in telling the story of Rose - a down on her luck teen-age almost adult girl who comes to live with a southern family during the depression in the 1930's. Although the film was edited for time (as all films are) the DVD provided more background information about the story through the commentary provided. Although I've never read the book - watching it again has made me decide that I want to. I count this movie with others of its' kind (TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, FRIED GREEN TOMATOES, THE HEART IS A LONELY HUNTER to name a few) as providing a wonderful opportunity to become a part of another's family memory. These kind of movies are capable of evoking in us a remembrance of our own childhood and bringing out feelings of warmth and caring that many of us have in common.I highly recommend it for its beautiful photography and wonderful music.