There are some movies that really awful. This is not exactly one of them, but without Jamie Gertz and Amanda Peterson, it would have been.
Kirk Cameron, as someone said, is not an actor. He has some ability; in this film none of it was displayed probably because of the script.
The script was a problem. The funny scenes were not always funny. The serious scenes were not always serious. There is a difference between serious and maudlin. Coach's baiting of Amanda Peterson's character was an outrage. We are never at liberty to publicly humiliate another human when there is nothing that can be done to change a handicap.
The directing also had problems, especially in the control of the minor characters, particularly Garson. We never find his actions either believable, or sympathetic. Jamie Gertz had a problem playing opposite both the lead and the supporting male.
So why the seven?
First, let me say that a debate about abortion is never out of date. Abortion is always something the right and the left have to deal with and deal with fairly and with the other's point of view. It is a complex, emotional issue. When Gertz delivers her summation of the abortion issues, we are more than attentive to what she has to say. Someone knew something about what a very young unmarried woman might feel having to retell and relive an event that has marked and devastated her since it happened. She carries the movie once she begins to explain "the bind we women are in." The wrap up artist, Kirk Cameron, cannot begin to hold us the way she has. We are not convinced by his "plan." The schools are overburdened as it is now. The same people who demand moral education in the schools would scream their heads off when they found out that not only can't Johnny spell, but he is being taught a moral code with which the objectors might not agree.
My vote: Harvard, but Jamie Gertz won her end of the debate.
Kirk Cameron, as someone said, is not an actor. He has some ability; in this film none of it was displayed probably because of the script.
The script was a problem. The funny scenes were not always funny. The serious scenes were not always serious. There is a difference between serious and maudlin. Coach's baiting of Amanda Peterson's character was an outrage. We are never at liberty to publicly humiliate another human when there is nothing that can be done to change a handicap.
The directing also had problems, especially in the control of the minor characters, particularly Garson. We never find his actions either believable, or sympathetic. Jamie Gertz had a problem playing opposite both the lead and the supporting male.
So why the seven?
First, let me say that a debate about abortion is never out of date. Abortion is always something the right and the left have to deal with and deal with fairly and with the other's point of view. It is a complex, emotional issue. When Gertz delivers her summation of the abortion issues, we are more than attentive to what she has to say. Someone knew something about what a very young unmarried woman might feel having to retell and relive an event that has marked and devastated her since it happened. She carries the movie once she begins to explain "the bind we women are in." The wrap up artist, Kirk Cameron, cannot begin to hold us the way she has. We are not convinced by his "plan." The schools are overburdened as it is now. The same people who demand moral education in the schools would scream their heads off when they found out that not only can't Johnny spell, but he is being taught a moral code with which the objectors might not agree.
My vote: Harvard, but Jamie Gertz won her end of the debate.