Girl 27

What a heart-wrenching story! The way Mr. Stenn, who also directs this film, presented Patricia's story is refreshing, in fact the manner in which he insinuated himself as a part of this drama seemed to be implicitly sanctioned by her own words. She was thankful that he persevered in his quest to obtain this particular story, despite her fears. Furthermore, he genuinely seemed to care for her, as well as what she had experienced. He was highly criticized by critics and reviewers for his unusual style - to allow his own relationship with Patricia to unfold on screen.

For so many of us women who have experienced assault during our lifetime and had to learn that 'safe' is a rather tenuous term, it can be comforting to see someone like Mr. Stenn put himself 'up front' as he did, in a supportive role. At least, I found it so in this film.

This documentary certainly rent the veil of 'The Good Old Days' to pieces. By interspersing some old film spots of MGM as Pat was delivering her interview, it was made much less easy to obtain that nostalgic feel we might usually glean.

Are men dogs? My uncle Doug (a self confessed dog) says it is so, and that, furthermore, we women just need to be aware and ever cynical. We are less naive these days, I think.

I believe lawyers would find it a tad bit trickier to dump such a case these days, as they did in Pat's. Still, then or today, it takes an inordinate amount of courage to attempt to hold someone accountable for committing such terrific violence against us. If anything, I appreciate Mr. Stenn for giving Patricia her opportunity for vindication, as well as my chance to experience, albeit vicariously, some sort of weird justice on this end.

The 1937 scandal is definitely a story worth learneing about. There are some interesting interviews, great film references, but the director of the film clearly does not know how to direct a documentary. There is an ego about him that is just not acceptable. He insinuates himself into the story and into the life of the woman who back in 1937 was Girl 27. He never passes up an opportunity to bring up the fact that he is also an author of celebrity biographies. He never passes up the opportunity to let his audience know the famous people he has worked with. I am not someone who believes there is a perfect cookie cutter way of making a documentary film. Sometimes it's necessary for a director to knock down that fourth wall and make himself or herself a presence in the film he or she is producing. A good director should never steer the focus of the subject matter onto himself or herself, though. David Stenn is not just annoying as a documentary filmmaker, he is disgraceful as a documentary filmmaker. This documentary should be taught in film schools about what NOT to do as a documentary filmmaker.

Anyway... this is the only existing documentary that covers the subject matter of the 1937 MGM sex scandal. It's a story worth knowing. It's unfortunate that the story was brushed under the rug as long as it was. In this, the time of #MeToo and #TimesUp, it's really important not to brush such stories under the rug. History absolutely repeats itself. 'Girl 27' as well as other documentary films and biopics like 2019's 'Judy', for example, are evidence that Louis B. Mayer was the Harvey Weinstein of the '30s, '40s, and '50s. Some people live their whole lives and die without being brought to justice for their horrible behavior. Justice sometimes comes in the form of unearthing the truth postmortem, denying their legacies praise, and condemning them for their insidious existence.

This exposes old Hollywood as a cesspool of corruption and cover ups, which historians already knew, but for the average person would be eye opening. Then you get the effects that a rape had on a person and how it trickles down through the generations added in to the mix which makes this a must see for anyone to understand how a violent act traumatizes more than just one person and why they need to be treated more seriously.

Girl 27 (2007)

**** (out of 4)

Rather sad documentary taking a look at a 1937 MGM case where Patricia Douglas was hired to appear in a movie at Hal Roach Studios but instead she was raped by a man and the crime was eventually covered up. This case made headlines at the time as Douglas was attacked but then the case pretty much went away for over six decades until director David Stenn heard about the case and was able to locate the woman. I've seen quite a few documentaries on MGM and it's clear looking at the studio today that they owned Los Angeles and that they weren't afraid to do harmful things (look at Judy Garland) or cover things up. This story here is just downright shocking because it makes everything so clear that MGM was calling the shots on everything and they were strong enough to have cops, politicians and lawyers in their pockets. I think what's so sad about this movie is the interview with the then 85-year-old Douglas who is clearly still haunted by the events that happened to her when she was 17. Seeing how this event damaged her life is just sad and seeing and hearing from her daughter isn't any more happy. The film has a very low-budget that does effect it somewhat but it never takes away from the power of the story. I also really liked how the director shows how the system worked back in the day and this includes showing how Douglas was being attacked by the media while Loretta Young was allowed to lie about an adoption when everyone knew that Clark Gable and her had the kid. Their daughter, Judy Lewis, is interviewed here as is Peggy Montgomery (aka Baby Peggy) who talks about the trouble that girls found themselves in at the studio. GIRL 27 is high drama from start to finish and I think it's an important story to tell no matter how ugly that story is.

I was glad to see that many of the other comments felt like I did - that this was a very compelling story - a story that should be brought to light, but that it is very badly handled by the inexperienced filmmaker. Now David Stenn is a talented writer and my friends who devour Hollywood biographies speak very highly of his (I believe he's written about Clara Bow and other big Hollywood Golden Era stars) and it is interesting how he came across this awful scandal that was covered up by MGM but he seems to not trust the power of poor Ms. Douglas' story and I actually was cringing with the horrid decision to add Hollywood movie clips of women being shaken or slapped or pushed down (from various fiction films) - as Ms. Douglas begins to tell of the actual sexual assault and how it destroyed her - the forced clips almost seemed to parody what was happening (which I am sure is the opposite effect the director wanted). The way the story is told, the way he films a lot of the interviews - it is just amateurish. I read the article Stenn wrote in Vanity Fair and that is much more complex and fascinating than the film. Hollywood truly had the power to sweep all of its dirty secrets under a large rug and this story is a perfect example of that. Ms. Douglas was a very brave woman to even try and stand up to MGM but of course they crushed her with newspaper lies and huge powerful law firms. The film is still worth watching because of the subject matter but as far as documentary skill - it truly fails.