This movie kept me glued to the screen. I think it is because of natural human instinct to be inquisitive about terrible & traumatic events that happen to others. Also, the acting was really believable and natural. The storyline was great, except for the ending. At the end of the movie, they had text on the screen telling what happened to each character. But they didn't tell enough of what happened to Katie. I don't like to be left hanging about the main character. It is like missing the end of the movie--what is the point of watching 90% of a movie, if you miss the last 10%? I really wanted to know the outcome, and still do. Maybe if I search online, I can find out some more information. It was definitely worth watching. But, I would have given it a score of 9 instead of 7 if it had more info about the main character and her ending.
44 Reviews
Worth watching
cakrit8 April 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This could have been a truly great film. I'll just say that I won't let my wife watch it, because she's too sensitive. It really left me wondering though. What happened to that poor girl? Is she OK? Why on earth would you leave me wondering after making me empathize with her like that? At the end, I was hoping that most of it was fiction, with a poorly written ending. I searched the internet immediately after watching it, looking for answers. The director/producer's comments clarified things a bit. What I got is that it should have never been made into a movie.
You see, you never make a movie if you want to tell a story exactly as it was. You make a documentary. A documentary might have left me with the same questions, but it would have been expected. At least, it would have hopefully been more objective. I agree with the comment that the psychology student is portrayed as a saint, though the facts leave you wondering.
In movies like these, you really need to explore very deeply each character. There were just too many people involved to do justice to each of them. If that female teacher was really as caring and successful, how come she couldn't get her back? If the psychology student was such a saint, how come she didn't sacrifice her career for the child? There were too many events to fit into a movie too.
All in all, watch it by all means. But be prepared for some strong feelings at the end.
You see, you never make a movie if you want to tell a story exactly as it was. You make a documentary. A documentary might have left me with the same questions, but it would have been expected. At least, it would have hopefully been more objective. I agree with the comment that the psychology student is portrayed as a saint, though the facts leave you wondering.
In movies like these, you really need to explore very deeply each character. There were just too many people involved to do justice to each of them. If that female teacher was really as caring and successful, how come she couldn't get her back? If the psychology student was such a saint, how come she didn't sacrifice her career for the child? There were too many events to fit into a movie too.
All in all, watch it by all means. But be prepared for some strong feelings at the end.
A horrific experience
Thulemanden20 September 2009
This movie should by no means be rated on it's entertainment value as some do as the true case is way too serious to consider for entertainment purposes.
I stumbled across it on a movie channel and just went along feeling more and more sad and frustrated over the total failure of the authorities to secure the interests of this poor, wretched human experiencing for 13 years a fate much worse than death and later being less than ideally where the therapists, teachers and researches take care of no. 1 first.
I don't know if anyone in America has learned anything from this case, but some historic words come into mind:
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
But is America really interested in helping any of these?
I missed a sharper critical profile in the movie on this aspect rather than letting everybody off easy.
The young actor did a tremendous job and can't be applauded enough.
I am not sure I want to recommend anyone seeing it, as it is way too sad. Maybe we are better off not knowing of the cruelty and stupidity some parents can subject their children to and easily get away with it.
I stumbled across it on a movie channel and just went along feeling more and more sad and frustrated over the total failure of the authorities to secure the interests of this poor, wretched human experiencing for 13 years a fate much worse than death and later being less than ideally where the therapists, teachers and researches take care of no. 1 first.
I don't know if anyone in America has learned anything from this case, but some historic words come into mind:
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
But is America really interested in helping any of these?
I missed a sharper critical profile in the movie on this aspect rather than letting everybody off easy.
The young actor did a tremendous job and can't be applauded enough.
I am not sure I want to recommend anyone seeing it, as it is way too sad. Maybe we are better off not knowing of the cruelty and stupidity some parents can subject their children to and easily get away with it.
One of the most realistic portrayals of child abuse cases
ziliazinola22 July 2002
The movie was set in the 70s and it accurately depicted the life and times through the clothes, hairdo, household products and music. The central character is the 13 year old victim of child abuse, Katie Standen and the women who sought to bring out of her abused state, namely her mother Mrs. Standen, child therapist Judy Bingham and psychology graduate student Sandra. The story is told from the point of view of Sandra. One can't help but feel a sense of melodrama and a tinge of sadness when seeing how all 3 desperately try to save Katie whilst fighting each other for her custody and trust. Katie, played by Tara Steele is excellent in her role as a victim who spits, vomits and then eats again her food and also, "touches" herself. The ending leaves you somewhat sad and melancholic and will stay in your head for days.
Mocking Bird Don't Sing my view
coffeehawk14 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I can't believe "Mocking Bird Don't Sing" was based off a true story, which makes the story all the more alarming. The accuracy of the story was incredible! Tarra Steele got Genie's "bunny walk" characteristic down insanely well. The walk was almost that of a blind person. Since Katie was tied chair in a dark room for the first thirteen years of her life; she couldn't focus on more then twelve feet ahead of her. When Katie choose to speak most of her words were negative such as "stopit" and "no more." These were the some of the few words Genie could say when they first found her. I can't blame Katie's mother for moving Katie and forbidding any of the team to go near her. The team failed Katie because they treated her more like a guinea pig and were not focused on helping her. The team was focused most on proving the Lenneberg Theory wrong. The theory was proved right and the end of the movie when Katie's mother forbid the team from going near her.
interesting and sensitively written!
chocolatelucy7721 November 2005
we had to watch this film for a psychology assignment and all i can say is that it was really fascinating! the plot was fantastic, it was so sensitively written...in fact it could have been dramatised a lot more...some films over dramatise child abuse. the actors were fantastic, especially the actress who played Katie: she was a real star! this is a fantastic movie for a psychology student as it is such a scientifically based film. only the letter at the top of the review page proves this! this is a fantastic movie for anyone interested in how people work, and for anyone who likes films with a real story behind them. i strongly recommend this film!!!!
My view of the production of Katie's story.
nova194220 August 2006
I don't understand everyone's laudatory comments on this production. Yes it was well acted, yes it was a true tragedy and yes the little girl did a marvelous acting job. But I feel it is lacking more of an explanation of the Mother's actions. It is appalling to me to see her hug her Mother as if she had nothing to do with her life as it was! There is no excuse for the Mother to have let her husband abuse her daughter for that length of time. She was not mentally ill. And it was alluded to that there was a deal made between the girl's parents which emphasizes that the Mother was not mentally challenged! It seems there are too many spaces missing in the story portrayed in the movie.
It is not historical but watchable
idonotexist7 November 2022
It follows the real case very faithfully at first, then diverts into its own drama on the level of any generic WE channel special for tv movie. I am not going to judge them on that too harshly, after all they never claimed it was the real full story, just used it as a basis for this.
The movie spends a lot of time showing the conflict between the various adults involved while still trying to keep some science going as the movie runs. It does a decent enough balance between drama and realism in such a situation from the scientific point of what happens to language skills if you never learned any. Is it something that is built into us, is it something we learn and if so, is it possible to not learn it?
Drama aside this is about the critical stage theory that was very intriguing to people in mid last century about people's ability to pick up language skills. Basically the theory says that if you miss the stage in your life where you learn language, any language, you can never learn it later. The longer time passes from that point the more impossible it is to acquire it. This is not to be confused with having learned it and then forgotten it due to many years of not using it; that is different. The movie does pretty well to cover that in simple terms and as a viewer you will walk away with actually learning something from this.
The cast and the acting.... not good. Honestly.. it's hit and miss. Michael learner probably delivered the worst performance of his life in this one which is baffling but it is what it is.. It was bad. His character was bad, his acting was bad, everything about that person in the movie was bad and annoying. The rest were ok, not fantastic but ok. Melissa erico did the best out of them all.
About the staging of the movie... low budget, but for a story like that you don't need much. One thing that should be pointed out, black make up around the eyes do not make a creepy/tired child or whatever they were doing. It is not halloween, why would you do that; i dont know. Good thing somebody figured how to wipe it off at some point.
Anyway, if you want a proper rendition of the story of susan wiley, this is not it, but it never claimed to be. It's a decent movie otherwise, as i said there is drama, some feels, some science, nothing overly horrible in any area really.. Just nothing fantastic either. It is a very ok movie. Worth a watch i suppose.
The movie spends a lot of time showing the conflict between the various adults involved while still trying to keep some science going as the movie runs. It does a decent enough balance between drama and realism in such a situation from the scientific point of what happens to language skills if you never learned any. Is it something that is built into us, is it something we learn and if so, is it possible to not learn it?
Drama aside this is about the critical stage theory that was very intriguing to people in mid last century about people's ability to pick up language skills. Basically the theory says that if you miss the stage in your life where you learn language, any language, you can never learn it later. The longer time passes from that point the more impossible it is to acquire it. This is not to be confused with having learned it and then forgotten it due to many years of not using it; that is different. The movie does pretty well to cover that in simple terms and as a viewer you will walk away with actually learning something from this.
The cast and the acting.... not good. Honestly.. it's hit and miss. Michael learner probably delivered the worst performance of his life in this one which is baffling but it is what it is.. It was bad. His character was bad, his acting was bad, everything about that person in the movie was bad and annoying. The rest were ok, not fantastic but ok. Melissa erico did the best out of them all.
About the staging of the movie... low budget, but for a story like that you don't need much. One thing that should be pointed out, black make up around the eyes do not make a creepy/tired child or whatever they were doing. It is not halloween, why would you do that; i dont know. Good thing somebody figured how to wipe it off at some point.
Anyway, if you want a proper rendition of the story of susan wiley, this is not it, but it never claimed to be. It's a decent movie otherwise, as i said there is drama, some feels, some science, nothing overly horrible in any area really.. Just nothing fantastic either. It is a very ok movie. Worth a watch i suppose.
Director/Producer responds to accusation of inaccuracy
Harry323-19 August 2003
8/9/03
Dear Sylvia Marciniak
Thank you for looking at our film "Mockingbird Don't Sing". I am the producer director.
I am intrigued by your comment that it was not accurate. In what respect, pray tell? We spent two years researching this subject and enlisted the service of Dr Susan Curtiss (named Sandra Tannen in the film) who was, as you will know from your research, present at all but the early stages of Genie/Katie's life starting a few months after she arrived at Children's hospital. We interviewed her for about 40 hours total and she was our primary source.
Susie Curtiss, now a linguistics professor at UCLA, signed off on this script as being as accurate a representation as was possible, given the constraints of having to make a drama out of the story. That is to say, we felt that all the lawsuits which followed the child's return to her mother belonged in another story.
I used many other sources, including "sealed" records from the Los Angeles courthouses, Dr Rigler, Dr Jay Shurley, John Miner, the child's onelime legal guardian, Dr Kay Natali and a host of others who were actually personally acquainted with the child and her situation for many years in the 1960s 70's and 80's.
I suspect that you have read Russ Rymer's book and New Yorker articles -- documents much derided by the actual participants in the true story because of their massive inaccuracies and because his primary contact was the child's mother, Irene (now deceased by the way). Have you read Dr Susan Curtiss' own book on the subject, I wonder: `Genie - A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern-Day `Wild Child'
So you see, I simply can't let you get away with the broad statement at the top of your comments "It's not accurate". You may have studied this case in class, but I spent three solid years on this killing myself to do justice to the story and to make it as accurately and elegantly as possible, and -- my God -- to actually manage to get a film made about such a risky and difficult subject.
I am saddened that you chose only to respond to the verisimilitude of the film. The names were changed for silly legal reasons beyond my control, but I might have hoped for a more reflective set of comments from a psychology student.
Now I'm sorry that I've yelled my head off at you -- you're probably a perfectly decent person. You should understand that this is an important movie for me and I don't respond well to uninformed criticism. You are free to dislike the picture, of course, but don't tell me "It's not accurate".
I do hope you will find time to reply and to forgive me for being such a curmudgeon.
Sincerely,
Harry Bromley-Davenport. (Producer/Director "Mockingbird Don't Sing")
Dear Sylvia Marciniak
Thank you for looking at our film "Mockingbird Don't Sing". I am the producer director.
I am intrigued by your comment that it was not accurate. In what respect, pray tell? We spent two years researching this subject and enlisted the service of Dr Susan Curtiss (named Sandra Tannen in the film) who was, as you will know from your research, present at all but the early stages of Genie/Katie's life starting a few months after she arrived at Children's hospital. We interviewed her for about 40 hours total and she was our primary source.
Susie Curtiss, now a linguistics professor at UCLA, signed off on this script as being as accurate a representation as was possible, given the constraints of having to make a drama out of the story. That is to say, we felt that all the lawsuits which followed the child's return to her mother belonged in another story.
I used many other sources, including "sealed" records from the Los Angeles courthouses, Dr Rigler, Dr Jay Shurley, John Miner, the child's onelime legal guardian, Dr Kay Natali and a host of others who were actually personally acquainted with the child and her situation for many years in the 1960s 70's and 80's.
I suspect that you have read Russ Rymer's book and New Yorker articles -- documents much derided by the actual participants in the true story because of their massive inaccuracies and because his primary contact was the child's mother, Irene (now deceased by the way). Have you read Dr Susan Curtiss' own book on the subject, I wonder: `Genie - A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern-Day `Wild Child'
So you see, I simply can't let you get away with the broad statement at the top of your comments "It's not accurate". You may have studied this case in class, but I spent three solid years on this killing myself to do justice to the story and to make it as accurately and elegantly as possible, and -- my God -- to actually manage to get a film made about such a risky and difficult subject.
I am saddened that you chose only to respond to the verisimilitude of the film. The names were changed for silly legal reasons beyond my control, but I might have hoped for a more reflective set of comments from a psychology student.
Now I'm sorry that I've yelled my head off at you -- you're probably a perfectly decent person. You should understand that this is an important movie for me and I don't respond well to uninformed criticism. You are free to dislike the picture, of course, but don't tell me "It's not accurate".
I do hope you will find time to reply and to forgive me for being such a curmudgeon.
Sincerely,
Harry Bromley-Davenport. (Producer/Director "Mockingbird Don't Sing")
Nature (Genetics) Vs. Nuture (Environment)
stephmyhr13 November 2008
We believe that Kady's situation was more due to her environment being so atrocious. Although she was born with a slight mental disability, being harassed and locked away in a room for 12 years would definitely have a major impact on her life and how to would interpret things in the future. If she would have gone to school at the age she was supposed to, she would have been able to learn more and become more mentally developed. Because she was never exposed to a normal life, so she had no way of knowing what was wrong or right, or try to get help for herself. She was brainwashed by her father and was scarred which didn't allow her to learn much after she was rescued. After being taken in by doctors she was exposed to many different environments causing her to be confused on what the doctors were expecting of her. When she was in the hospital she was numb and depressed, she needed a normal environment to live in to be able to adjust to the real world. She was forced to live with a very talented, although selfish doctor who specialized in these type of situations. She was very controlling of Kady and attempted to shut her out from the rest of the world. Afterwards she went to live with a doctor which allowed her to both learn new things and spend time in a normal household with a family structure.When she was forced to move in with her mother she felt the pain she had felt when she had lived in the house a few years before. She had left her mother's house due to her mother not being able to handle Kady. When she was placed in a foster home, she was taught new rules and regulations that confused her and made her start going "backwards" from everything that she has learned. She was scared of the family and was abused both physically and emotionally. After being placed back into the hospital, her mother had her removed and sent her to a private household where the doctors could perform no further research. Because Kady had so many different surroundings and environments she was unstable and unaware of what was really expected of her.
The Fathers Affect on Katie
ronning_0213 November 2008
Mockingbird Don't Sing seemed to portray a very close comparison to the life Katie has lived. This isn't a movie of great excitement and joy, but then again, most of her life wasn't a very pretty picture. Her father was the main enforcer in this tragedy she went through. It seemed as though he had no clue what he was doing. His actions were immoral, violent, and showed no love for his daughter. His last letter said "The world will never understand." It raises the question if he maybe had a good reason for excluding his daughter from society and all it has to offer. A man wrote "No ideas can be shown scientifically to be right or wrong"(Deflem 1). The fact is that if the girl was born retarded or not, Katie was deprived of her childhood and civilization which lead to her problems and abnormalities. The best part about this story is that people never gave up on her once she was found. As the film came to a close, there wasn't a smile on my face, but I think the objective of the movie is to acknowledge the idea that a life is very precious and often turns out the way it has been molded.
What can I say?
stamper12 January 2003
I missed this film, when it was displayed at University by my' Psychology department, but as soon as I stumbled over it in our local Video Store, I rented it and quite honestly, I don't know what to tell you. I really believe, that I can't say this was a good film, because the story is just too sad and too real. What I can say though, is that this is an utmost interesting film, which displays what humans are capable of in a very professional way. I must say this, for I felt this was not so much a dramatized version of a true life event, but rather a documentary on a true life event. This is neither a tear jerker, nor a graphically violent film but maybe that it is also the reason it is twice as memorable as your average psychological drama. This film will leave you sitting shocked and numb in front of your TV.
8 out of 10 (for people who are really interested in the human psyche like psychology students)
7 out of 10 (for the average viewer)
8 out of 10 (for people who are really interested in the human psyche like psychology students)
7 out of 10 (for the average viewer)
Isolation
n_nellermoe913 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Katie's isolation from the world began when she was 20 months old and went on for 13 years. During her isolation she was abused by her father. In her 13 years of isolation she never learned to talk; only a few words including "stopit" and "nomore." Her motor skills were that of a baby and she never learned the proper way to act and behave. When Katie's mother took her out of isolation she had to learn all these skills. She was pushed to learn how to talk and act in a way that society would accept. Right away Katie progressed fast, but after awhile her progress began to level off. She was never able to get past a 3rd grade level. To this day Genie, Katie, is unable to put together grammatical sentences. When children are isolated from language there is a block and they are unable to speak in sentences. This is what happened to Genie. It wasn't that she was "retarded," it was because she was isolated from the language. She was then expected to learn and catch on just because she was old enough to communicate and no longer isolated. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=4804490&page=1
Missed Opportunity at what could have been great
djbvk2129 September 2021
Just came across this movie on TUBI tv. Absolutely horrifying story of heinous child abuse. There is a lot here to unpack into a movie - I get that. Just wish it was centered around accurate timelines that made sense. I looked up the true story as I was watching the movie. So it wasn't making sense. Again it's a lot to u pack and I'm sure where it becomes hard to watch - that and the bad acting and bad script. Anyhow my penny. It's truly an unforgettable story that I hope someone decides to re create some day - maybe a limited series to get a better understanding of time lines.
Wonderful Movie
C319415 August 2003
I loved this movie so much that I have been trying to buy it since I saw it. I am in the middle of the book now. I could watch this movie 1000 times and not get bored. Good directing and casting!! I think anyone who sees it will come away with a feeling that will stay for days, maybe weeks!!
Almost a great movie
jenifer-m9919 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
After seeing this film, I am heartbroken and outraged. Outraged that Katie was ripped away time and again from the only person who had her best interest at heart. But, I'm disappointed that this movie only found its audience by way of a low budget indie movie. Mr. Davenport antagonistically replied to another viewer's comments which only shows that his ego likely got in the way of this movie possibly being the kind of film that creates a dialogue and inspires change. The only actor with any skill is Melissa Errico, but even her lines fell a little short at times. I think the director was lazy at how Katie was shuffled from place to place. Who ever in the world has heard of a hospital NOT allowing someone with rubella to enter? They could have just put her in an isolation room. The social worker at DSS was ridiculous. "The problem is with Katie, not the foster family." Please. And this being such a high profile case, Katie would have had a social worker documenting every step she made. If she had stopped talking and begun mutilating herself, she would have been moved. It would have been better if the social worker, the doctors, even the mother had tried harder to help her but got stalled by a CPS system that is broken and doesn't protect the children. But for every person except Sandra not to give a crap is just dumb. CPS isn't going to just arbitrarily give a special needs kid back to the mother who stayed silent while her daughter was tortured for 13 years. She would have had supervised visits, had to apply for custody...I mean, the number of inconsistencies are just outrageous. And I'm really sad about that. This could have been a great movie. It was good. Mostly good.
Katie and the Social Norms
cherry-ny13 November 2008
Well, considering that this movie mostly talks about the social norms of our society and how abuse affects it, it was a pretty good movie. I really enjoyed how the directors and screenwriters displayed Katie and how she has, not only development problems but also a very crude sexual history for only being an early teen. The reality of the film and how Katie was bounced around from home to home, and how the viewers could view her confusion and frustration was key to showing her development as the movie progresses. in a student textbook 'Sociology and You' social norms are discusses as far as a well known sociologist Freud goes. It was interesting to see how Katie was slowly transforming from her id state and reached her ego state. Unfortunately, Katie never reached the superego state. She could not progress, for there had been too much damage done, with being held captive in a small dark room for so many year all alone. Truth be told, it is normal for the grants like the one that Sandra requested to be put down, or taken away. If the progress is not continuing, like with Katie, the state feels no need to continue spending money on a 'lost cause' so to speak. Fortunately, Katie may not have been able to speak properly, but she was able to learn sign language. although, in her foster home, she was not allowed to use the sign that she was taught and was forced to speak her choppy sentences.
Katie and Id, Ego, and Superego
salscheider5513 November 2008
I'd like to comment on the different affects that Katie's environment had on her throughout the movie. There is an extreme link in Katie's behavior that alludes towards the theory of id, ego, and superego.Id is characterized by the basic survival instincts and ego and superego form towards the stages of maturity which consist of knowing the correct way to conduct your behavior and superego regards morals and such. We saw that she had not yet developed the ego or superego, because she lived on a survival instincts alone. She lived solely to survive with no regards to other people. She didn't have any socialization to rely on and she was alone about 23/24 hours a day. When she was first rescued from her home she had very primitive communication skills like grunting and using gestures with her hands. The theory that feral children can not learn a primitive language after going through puberty was proved true in this specific case. She was however able to keep all the speech she had already learned. You can see in the movie that if sign language would've been encouraged more she could've been much more successful with learning. Katie had already learned how to communicate without speaking so giving her a new venue that others knew as well would have helped her throughout her lifetime.
Surprisingly good film!
worldofsnail4 August 2007
This awful story of child abuse aired in the UK on the True Movies channel (I believe). The next day at work, nearly everyone I know was intent on discussing it. The acting was excellent throughout and the interest was held by some fine directing.
There are so many points to ponder in this film. You don't have to be a psychology student to appreciate it - just a normal decent human being.
I looked this up on the IMDb because I had been reading an old interview with Harry Bromley-Davenport (in Dark Side magazine). Given the sort of films he has made in the past, I feel at last he now has a film he can be truly proud of. Well done old chap - there's clearly more to you than 'Xtro'!
There are so many points to ponder in this film. You don't have to be a psychology student to appreciate it - just a normal decent human being.
I looked this up on the IMDb because I had been reading an old interview with Harry Bromley-Davenport (in Dark Side magazine). Given the sort of films he has made in the past, I feel at last he now has a film he can be truly proud of. Well done old chap - there's clearly more to you than 'Xtro'!
Raw meat?
ole131613 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
One part we don't understand is why that butcher man give Katie raw meat. She could've gotten e. coli or some other disease. Also, we don't understand what her obsession was with pails and plastic stuff. This movie failed to explain any of these. Another part we didn't understand is where Judy came from and why the court was giving her so much power. She was doing basically the same thing as Sandra if not less. The most confusing part of this movie we thought was how Katie's mother was able to go into the foster care place and take her daughter back. That wouldn't have happened in reality! We don't think that Katie was retarded from birth, but that she developed retardation from her upbringing. Her parents were two irresponsible people that should've never produced offspring. They should have both been placed in jail, but the father killed himself and for some reason the mother didn't have to go to jail, which we don't understand. Her mom was just as guilty as her dad, but all the court did was give her a free cataract surgery. We found this film to be completely unrealistic and obscure.
One Of The Most Depressing Stories Ever
jimcarter195931 October 2021
It's hard to believe an atrocity such as this occurred in the United States. The lack of punishment for the parents illustrates yet another breakdown of the system. My emotions swung between sadness and anger. This is something everyone should watch.
Don't waste your time with this boring film.
billysbar8 March 2005
The premise would appear to be...
take a 5 minute news story within which you can impart all the facts and then spin it out into a most boring and dull film.
There was really no point to making this film, and even less point in my watching it through to the end.
Whenever you see 'based on true facts' or similar it should start the alarm bells ringing in your head that someone somewhere has had the great idea (or more realistically, they have had no original idea) to turn an extremely sad story of child neglect into a film, give it a catchy title and some meaty trailers and let it loose on an unsuspecting public. This was indeed the case here, so be warned.
The filmmaker will no doubt go onto do some needless dreadful remakes of classic films.
take a 5 minute news story within which you can impart all the facts and then spin it out into a most boring and dull film.
There was really no point to making this film, and even less point in my watching it through to the end.
Whenever you see 'based on true facts' or similar it should start the alarm bells ringing in your head that someone somewhere has had the great idea (or more realistically, they have had no original idea) to turn an extremely sad story of child neglect into a film, give it a catchy title and some meaty trailers and let it loose on an unsuspecting public. This was indeed the case here, so be warned.
The filmmaker will no doubt go onto do some needless dreadful remakes of classic films.
A movie told with much love.
ShaunV199026 August 2017
I don't even know where to begin. This movie moved me from the first minute to the last minute. I got sucked in to the story and it didn't even let me go after I was finished with this movie.
This movie is the best example of how to make a movie that shines in authenticity. I read the review of the director himself on this page. So I knew how much work and research went in to this movie. There for I thank you Harry Bromley Davenport. Because this is a story that had to be told. I thank you for staying true to the facts and portraying this movie in such a way that we all could feel how emotional involved you were in this case.
This brings me to why I liked this movie so much. At first I was a little bit surprised by how low budget this movie really looked. Instead of making it a disadvantage the director made a really clever good paced movie. The movie doesn't tend to stick to long in one period. It's a linear told story. Which really helps to get sucked in to the story. Not overly made complicated with a lot of flashbacks. Just an honest good told story. You really start to bond quickly with the characters. I must say the acting was really well done. Tarra Steele does an amazing job, the role she plays is exceptional difficult to portray in a believable way. I looked her up and came to the conclusion that she didn't act in any other movie. Shame! I was equally impressed with the actress who played the mother. She plays the role with the little twist of social awkwardness, very subtle. The actress who plays Sandra does an amazing job as well.
8/10
This movie is the best example of how to make a movie that shines in authenticity. I read the review of the director himself on this page. So I knew how much work and research went in to this movie. There for I thank you Harry Bromley Davenport. Because this is a story that had to be told. I thank you for staying true to the facts and portraying this movie in such a way that we all could feel how emotional involved you were in this case.
This brings me to why I liked this movie so much. At first I was a little bit surprised by how low budget this movie really looked. Instead of making it a disadvantage the director made a really clever good paced movie. The movie doesn't tend to stick to long in one period. It's a linear told story. Which really helps to get sucked in to the story. Not overly made complicated with a lot of flashbacks. Just an honest good told story. You really start to bond quickly with the characters. I must say the acting was really well done. Tarra Steele does an amazing job, the role she plays is exceptional difficult to portray in a believable way. I looked her up and came to the conclusion that she didn't act in any other movie. Shame! I was equally impressed with the actress who played the mother. She plays the role with the little twist of social awkwardness, very subtle. The actress who plays Sandra does an amazing job as well.
8/10
The Forbidden Experiment
pearberry5213 November 2008
The Forbidden Experiment is the main point of the story, describing how does a person being isolated learn the basic needs without being taught. The Critical Period Hypothesis has been proved as a theory. They say your brain as a kid, is like a sponge. As you develop and hit puberty this is when your brain cannot absorb much from when you were a younger child. It is easier to learn a language when you are a child, you memorize the words, not focusing on what they mean much. With sign language it is a totally different meaning. Some people are better learning with their hands than speaking, some say it is easier to learn. Because Katie had been isolated from the world, it would have been better if she just focused on using her hands to communicate with people. It seemed that she could learn sign language faster than she could ever learn to speak words. With sign language she seemed much easier to understand than speaking, this would keep her and anybody with her not as frustrated. Was Katie mentally challenged from her being isolated and having limited to no socialization, or from birth? The doctors had said she was mentally challenged from when she was an infant, but having no contact with people could have caused retardation.
www.everythingispointless.com/2006/12/forbidden-experiment.html
www.everythingispointless.com/2006/12/forbidden-experiment.html
comment on movie
darkangel3811 March 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This story is very tragic and sad mad me cry...the documentaries not the movie. I just think that they made her look like she was beaten up. We really don't know if Genie was actually beaten. In the video clip she looked like a girl how was almost being killed by a serial killer. And i know for sure that that never happened. I never watched it but i saw some clips. i would watch it. I just think the documentaries i saw in sociology and psychology class helped more and mad me feel sad. It truly captured what was going on because they actually showed Genie and the scientists. Does anyone know where i can find this. I just wish i could post this already they wont let me. well i know Genie was discovered at the age of 13, had lived in a state of severe sensory and social deprivation. Strapped to a potty-chair in her home in Temple City, Los Angeles, California, Genie wasn't taught to speak, and was denied normal human interaction.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
