IMDb रेटिंग
8.1/10
2.8 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA graphic documentary on both sides of the abortion debate.A graphic documentary on both sides of the abortion debate.A graphic documentary on both sides of the abortion debate.
- पुरस्कार
- 14 कुल नामांकन
John Britton
- Self - Ladies Health Center, Pensacola
- (as Dr. John Britton)
Joycelyn Elders
- Self - Surgeon General, 1993-1994
- (आर्काइव फ़ूटेज)
Kevin Fitzpatrick
- Self - Department of Sociology, University of Alabama
- (as Prof. Kevin Fitzpatrick)
Paul Hill
- Self - Convicted of Abortion Related Murder
- (आर्काइव फ़ूटेज)
Roger Hunt
- Self - Prime Sponsor, South Dakota Anti-Abortion Bill
- (as Representative Roger Hunt)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Tony Kaye shows that he is prepared to encounter the debate on abortion by covering an incredibly wide range of point of views and doesn't leave out even the most difficult parts. I will start with "harcore" reality details of the abortive presager before I entail my global feelings on how I received this workpiece. I had to stop viewing for a couple of minutes after they showed the fetuses, my heart was pounding, I felt dizzy, sad and mentally assaulted by those images because they just wouldn't get out of my head once I saw them. Nonetheless I still am pro-choice having being hit by that, It forced me to consider the painful reality that go with my own position. This, of course balanced with so many other things that are also thoroughly explored and exposed in the documentary.
Calling Tony Kaye a "biaest" on that matter doesn't do him justice at all. Simply because neutrality in this just has no existence, the relevant material that piles up in the concerned matter as you go further into it, is bound to lead you somewhere. If their is something going on around you and choose not to implicate yourself, you are in fact indirectly making a choice, the choice of leaving it in the hands of those who are ready to carry out decision. I'm not a Christian but I was raised in that manner so I can refer to a story which most of us know and that is the story of Pilate who also took a step back but nonetheless is a part of the picture, that nails down the point that "not to do" is to "let others do" for the best and for worst parts.
This documentary also shows the mind blowing contradictions that inhabits the fundamentalists stirring up on the pro-life side. The fact that they are ready to take on destructive action on the behalf of their posture, stretching a huge focus on that subject while seemingly indifferent to other subjects that involves human choices and it's caused suffering that are by close or by far correlative to abortion. I'll finish by saying that having claims towards even the most wonderful values doesn't suffice at all, being unable to reflect on your own self and the actions you undertake and paying no attention to the conditions of others and more importantly the ones that should justify some of your moral standards is one of the roots of a hypocrisy, denial and egocentric behaviors.
Calling Tony Kaye a "biaest" on that matter doesn't do him justice at all. Simply because neutrality in this just has no existence, the relevant material that piles up in the concerned matter as you go further into it, is bound to lead you somewhere. If their is something going on around you and choose not to implicate yourself, you are in fact indirectly making a choice, the choice of leaving it in the hands of those who are ready to carry out decision. I'm not a Christian but I was raised in that manner so I can refer to a story which most of us know and that is the story of Pilate who also took a step back but nonetheless is a part of the picture, that nails down the point that "not to do" is to "let others do" for the best and for worst parts.
This documentary also shows the mind blowing contradictions that inhabits the fundamentalists stirring up on the pro-life side. The fact that they are ready to take on destructive action on the behalf of their posture, stretching a huge focus on that subject while seemingly indifferent to other subjects that involves human choices and it's caused suffering that are by close or by far correlative to abortion. I'll finish by saying that having claims towards even the most wonderful values doesn't suffice at all, being unable to reflect on your own self and the actions you undertake and paying no attention to the conditions of others and more importantly the ones that should justify some of your moral standards is one of the roots of a hypocrisy, denial and egocentric behaviors.
It seems fitting that I watched this on the very day that I read about the atrocious state of child protection in Oklahoma. It is a reminder of the definition of "Pro-Life" that I believe so strongly: they only care about life before it is born, and are not concerned with life after birth.
It was an outstanding documentary that gave both sides of the issue, even to the point of showing an actual abortion being performed. I could have done without that. This is however, the definitive film on the issue.
Some may consider it slanted as it showed the pro-life advocates as crazy loons, but when they are self-confessed bigots like leader Randall Terry, and Klan members/ministers like John Burk that consider murderers "patriots," what else can you call them. This film will give you a good picture of where this issue started, and why it continues to this day. You will learn just who is keeping this alive and their reasons for doing so. You will also be well informed on the types of people who are using this issue for their personal causes.
Great film to educate you on this sensitive issue.
It was an outstanding documentary that gave both sides of the issue, even to the point of showing an actual abortion being performed. I could have done without that. This is however, the definitive film on the issue.
Some may consider it slanted as it showed the pro-life advocates as crazy loons, but when they are self-confessed bigots like leader Randall Terry, and Klan members/ministers like John Burk that consider murderers "patriots," what else can you call them. This film will give you a good picture of where this issue started, and why it continues to this day. You will learn just who is keeping this alive and their reasons for doing so. You will also be well informed on the types of people who are using this issue for their personal causes.
Great film to educate you on this sensitive issue.
10brumps
The only thing important missing from the film is the impact that overturning Roe v Wade might have on the infertility industry. My husband and I had to resort to in vitro in order to conceive our twin boys. Four fertilized eggs were implanted in me. Fortunately, only two remained viable. But what if all four survived? I would have chosen to "reduce" the embryos. As it was my pregnancy was difficult. I went into pre-term labor at 28 weeks. At 32 weeks they had to induce as my babies were starting to kill me. Imagine if I hadn't had the option to "reduce" and all four implanted. What if the law required me to carry the fetuses until my life was in danger instead of "reducing" early in the pregnancy? Or, what if I had 14 embryos, 4 implanted and 10 frozen? Would the frozen ones then be considered "alive" and therefore could not be discarted? What would be the option then? Would I be prosecuted for 10 counts of murder? So I think the film needed to cover this aspect of the debate. Otherwise it was an exceptional documentary.
I saw a few people on here proclaiming themselves as pro-life and panning the film for supposedly being biased against their view.
First of all, purely on balance alone I'd say the film is equal to both sides. It's just that most of the stuff which makes you want to be pro-life comes at the beginning of the film while most of the content which makes you want to be pro-choice comes in the second half. It seems to me that they're just upset that their side didn't get the proverbial last word.
Secondly, this film is not about balance anyway. It's about documenting the cultural debate in the film about abortion in America. Whether one or two dissenting reviewers of this film are or not, the fact is that most of the pro-life advocates are Christian religious fringe. Of course there are exceptions, and they document that in the movie. Although I don't think Kaye should have given an hour to the secular atheist pro-lifers, because frankly there aren't that many of them.
The criticism also seem to come from people who don't even understand any points being made in the movie -- one reviewer claimed that Chomsky was comparing abortion to a woman washing her hands. That's not what he was doing at all. His example was made to demonstrate the relativity involved with the process of placing value on life.
In any event, the film definitely is a roller coaster ride, and there are times where you might find yourself at odds with your own opinion. The movie being as balanced as it is, probably wont change a lot of minds, but I would think at the very least it would soften your position one way or another. If it doesn't, you're either just stubborn, or you weren't even trying to pay attention to the message of the film.
First of all, purely on balance alone I'd say the film is equal to both sides. It's just that most of the stuff which makes you want to be pro-life comes at the beginning of the film while most of the content which makes you want to be pro-choice comes in the second half. It seems to me that they're just upset that their side didn't get the proverbial last word.
Secondly, this film is not about balance anyway. It's about documenting the cultural debate in the film about abortion in America. Whether one or two dissenting reviewers of this film are or not, the fact is that most of the pro-life advocates are Christian religious fringe. Of course there are exceptions, and they document that in the movie. Although I don't think Kaye should have given an hour to the secular atheist pro-lifers, because frankly there aren't that many of them.
The criticism also seem to come from people who don't even understand any points being made in the movie -- one reviewer claimed that Chomsky was comparing abortion to a woman washing her hands. That's not what he was doing at all. His example was made to demonstrate the relativity involved with the process of placing value on life.
In any event, the film definitely is a roller coaster ride, and there are times where you might find yourself at odds with your own opinion. The movie being as balanced as it is, probably wont change a lot of minds, but I would think at the very least it would soften your position one way or another. If it doesn't, you're either just stubborn, or you weren't even trying to pay attention to the message of the film.
Caveat: I have been a pro-choice activist for many years in my home country of Canada, and attended the "March for Women's Lives" in Washington D.C. in 2004. Obviously I have a pretty solid opinion on this issue, but below I have tried to just talk about the film itself.
I saw this a couple of days ago at the Toronto Film Festival. I think it is an unflinching look at the how the battle over abortion rights has played out in the United States over the last 15 years or so. It was intended to be unbiased, an even-handed look at both sides of the issue. By and large, I think Kaye succeeded at this, but I would very much like to attend a screening of this film before an audience of committed pro-lifers to see what they think of it. I couldn't help but think that nearly all the pro-lifers interviewed came across as deeply disturbed, with a couple of exceptions.
The film clocks in at over two and a half hours and could easily loose 30 minutes without taking away from the impact of the film. Similarly it ends dreadfully - overblown music and an utterly inconsequential shot - the director having missed the perfect spot to end it 5 minutes beforehand.
Shot entirely in black and white, there are several moments of stunning beauty, contrasting with the frequently dull and suburban backgrounds in which such a passionate battle is being waged by both sides.
Overall I would definitely recommend this film, but only after it is re-edited from its present version.
A last note: Tony Kaye was present at the screening and gave an utterly bizarre performance during the Q&A at the end of the movie. He stood at the mike, rubbing his face vigorously, making little sense and often at a loss for words. We were planning to ask questions but he was so out of it that we decided not to waste our time!
I saw this a couple of days ago at the Toronto Film Festival. I think it is an unflinching look at the how the battle over abortion rights has played out in the United States over the last 15 years or so. It was intended to be unbiased, an even-handed look at both sides of the issue. By and large, I think Kaye succeeded at this, but I would very much like to attend a screening of this film before an audience of committed pro-lifers to see what they think of it. I couldn't help but think that nearly all the pro-lifers interviewed came across as deeply disturbed, with a couple of exceptions.
The film clocks in at over two and a half hours and could easily loose 30 minutes without taking away from the impact of the film. Similarly it ends dreadfully - overblown music and an utterly inconsequential shot - the director having missed the perfect spot to end it 5 minutes beforehand.
Shot entirely in black and white, there are several moments of stunning beauty, contrasting with the frequently dull and suburban backgrounds in which such a passionate battle is being waged by both sides.
Overall I would definitely recommend this film, but only after it is re-edited from its present version.
A last note: Tony Kaye was present at the screening and gave an utterly bizarre performance during the Q&A at the end of the movie. He stood at the mike, rubbing his face vigorously, making little sense and often at a loss for words. We were planning to ask questions but he was so out of it that we decided not to waste our time!
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाIt took 16 years to make this film.
- भाव
Noam Chomsky: You are not going to get the answers from holy texts. You are not going to get the answers from biologists. These are matters of human concern that have to be discussed seriously...
- कनेक्शनFeatured in WatchMojo: Another Top 10 Controversial Documentary Films (2017)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Lake of Fire?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $25,317
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $2,559
- 7 अक्टू॰ 2007
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $25,317
- चलने की अवधि
- 2 घं 32 मि(152 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें