Colibel
Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.
Stevecorp
Don't listen to the negative reviews
Geraldine
The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
writers_reign
It's difficult not to praise this film too highly and one has to admire the professionalism of Burt Lancaster and Judy Garland both of whom found Cassavetes' directing style anathema yet persevered and turned out an unforgettable film. Whilst on the one hand it is sad verging on tragic that Garland was absent from the screen after I Could Go On Singing, released the same year (1963) as this, on the other hand we can rejoice that in her last decade as a film actress she appeared in three exceptional movies - A Star Is Born, Judgment At Nurenberg and ACIW - and one near-miss, I Could Go On Singing, all of them drawing heavily on her acting chops despite numbers 1 and 4 being ostensibly musicals. Whilst it's true that Hollywood has made a decent fist of 'non-commercial' subjects over the years - Pinky, Gentlemen's Agreement, Home Of The Brave, etc - even as late as 1963 children with euphemistic 'special needs' was still virgin territory and everyone involved in this production is due a vote of thanks.
wes-connors
Emotionally disturbed Judy Garland (as Jean Hansen) gets a job looking after children at the Crawthorne State Mental Hospital and Training School. A former music teacher, Ms. Garland becomes attached to 12-year-old Bruce Ritchey (as Reuben Widdicombe) and clashes with psychiatrist boss Burt Lancaster (as Matthew Clark). This eventually leads to a crisis, but both Garland and young Ritchey grow from the experience. Working with the bond formed by "Reuben" and Garland, Mr. Lancaster also learns something. Garland directs the children in a Thanksgiving play, and another chapter in Ritchey's life unfolds...This was the first of two final feature films for Garland, though she continued to be taped and filmed in many fine appearances. Both "A Child Is Waiting" and "I Could Go on Singing" take into consideration Garland's emotional state and musical abilities; here, her rough edges become part of the characterization. Lancaster and Garland do not disappoint, but the real treat is watching the nearly hidden away story and performances of parents Steven Hill (as Ted Widdicombe) and Gena Rowlands (Sophie), a realistic couple who love their children but make mistakes. Of course, this description fits any set of parents...There are some concerns here with editing - one of the problems between filmmakers Stanley Kramer and John Cassavetes that has been documented publicly - mostly, this leads to confusion about exactly when "Reuben" arrived at which institution. And, some unnecessary pity and cuteness can occasionally be felt. Otherwise, this is a fine social conscious-raising drama, for the time. Presently, most of the institutionalized individuals depicted herein show little reason not to be back in their regular communities, with their parents and peers. Everyone loses when we exclude people who are different, for that reason alone.******* A Child Is Waiting (1/14/63) John Cassavetes ~ Judy Garland, Burt Lancaster, Bruce Ritchey, Steven Hill
Jay09101951
The latest numbers as of May 2009 say that 1 in 150 children in the US have some form of autistic spectrum disorder. While this film is mainly about "mentanly retarded children", which is today a term no longer used, the fact is that many autistic children have a low IQ and have much difficulty learning. Today, all children, no matter what their IQ, are all guaranteed the proper education under the Americans with disabilities act of 1975. In 1963 when this film was made, education for disabled children was not a fact yet. This film was 30 years ahead of it's time. But the thing this terrific film can do is get a message across to the millions of parents of disabled children who are living in denial about their child's disability that the longer they choose to ignore it and think it will just "go away" or some "miracle drug" will cure their child. What they are doing is hurting their child. Well,there are no "quick fixes" out there. Only a program like the one Dr. Clark started to help each child reach their full potential. And like the film, it is true that more half of families that have an autistic child will wind up getting divorced. Only the strong parents, the ones that accept their child as he or she is will stay strong. This just a great, great film and I am happy Judy Garland was able to stay sober long enough to give what I consider to be her finest performance by far in any film.
Ed Uyeshima
What an odd, unexpected movie this is. Stanley Kramer reunited Burt Lancaster and Judy Garland from his 1961 "Judgment at Nuremberg" for this grim near-docudrama about mentally disabled children in a state-run institution. Again working from a script by Abby Mann, Kramer handed over the directorial reins to John Cassavetes in only his third film. Some of Cassavetes' cinema-verité style is on display here, though there are definitely enough soap opera turns to make you realize that this is ultimately a social message film.The director cast real patients from the Pacific State Hospital in Pomona, California, as most of the handicapped children and in one harrowing scene, as the mentally defective adults. This lends a searing veracity to many of the scenes, and the effect is mesmerizing. Intriguingly, a few are actors, and you are likely to recognize a quick glimpse of Billy Mumy (Will Robinson in TV's "Lost in Space") as one of the children. In the central role of Reuben, a borderline case, a twelve-year old actor named Bruce Ritchey is convincing in evoking the emotional isolation and inward terrorism of his character. The plot revolves around Reuben and the battle of wills over his treatment between Dr. Matthew Clark, the fair-minded director of the mental hospital, and Jean Hansen, a newly hired teacher.Lancaster is such a forthright screen presence that he is automatically credible in the authority role of Clark. Garland, looking bloated and overly made up, has a role that suits her persona at the time. As Jean, she poignantly conveys an unfulfilled maternal instinct especially as she starts to focus most of her time on Reuben to the inadvertent detriment of the other children. Even without an Arlen song, Garland can capture the internal tremolo of a woman whose only avenue for love is the children. Obviously the character was tailored for Garland, as Jean is a former musician trained at Julliard who failed to become a concert pianist. In a defining moment, she does get to teach one simple rhyming song, "Snowflakes", to the children for a Thanksgiving pageant.I like the fact that there is nary a romantic spark between Lancaster and Garland in the story, as they are there to represent opposing perspectives. I only wish there was a bit more emotionalism in the way they argued about it, as it takes an hour for either one of them to raise their voices. Due mostly to Mann's unimpactful, enervating script, the whole film feels mannered in that way, which is what prevents the film from being wholly satisfying. The lack of an emotional pay-off, while realistic, does not provide the closure a viewer needs with such a desultory story.Familiar faces fill the supporting cast. Cassavetes' wife, a young Gena Rowlands, plays Reuben's brittle, guilt-ridden mother Sophie, while Steven Hill plays the emotionally disconnected father who takes Reuben to the hospital only to abandon him. Paul Stewart and John Marley play state officials who need to assess future funding of the school. It's a tough movie to sit through, but the honest depiction of the children and the state of such facilities at the time, along with the low-key sincerity of Lancaster and Garland, make this one worthwhile.
