thejcowboy22 This movie personally hits home with me as I was personally attached to people with mental disorders. I had a cousin who was born with a brain injury. I watched my siblings and cousins grow with the usual maturation process except for my damaged cousin as she did develop as a woman yet her brain remained unvaried. I also watched her parents, my second cousins deal with her condition. They loved her and treated her as if she was normal. Moreover her parents were huge members of The organization AHRC to raise money for the mentally disabled. I always wondered how parents dealt with their mentally disabled children? I was first exposed to this shocking film about life in a institution for mentally challenged Children shown on the Million Dollar Movie in New York in the late 1960's, I was about 10 years old. Our movie starts with an upscale couple, the Widdicombes, Ted and Sophie played by Steven Hill and Gena Rowlands. Their new born child Rueben who seems dormant lying in his crib uninterested is questioned by his mother but the Rueben's father claims that another boy didn't speak for years and grew up a success. A few years passed and The Widdecombes have a second child, a girl who is normal yet you see Mr. Widdecombe taking Rueben for IQ tests to various doctors who claim he is under the normal curve in intelligence. The parents realize that their son is a failure as the Father drives at top speed to a mental institution and coerces Rueben out of his car. Our scene shifts to new Players in our tearful story a Dr. Matthew Clark (Burt Lancaster) who runs the facility has strict methods in his teaching approach to the disabled and refuses to coddled them along making them useless in their futures. Lancaster yet strict is restrained throughout and never useless harsh language or acts of violence like you would see in an Oliver Twist institution. Enter our other star the chunky yet vulnerable Jean Hansen played by Judy Garland who is hired as the music teacher in the film. Rueben despondent and discarded by his parents who never come on visiting day adopts Miss Hansen as a surrogate Mom and becomes quite attached to her amongst the consternation on the other students. The pressures of the job get to Miss Hansen who had no prior experience in working with mentally handicapped. As I watched this film I saw the hopelessness and felt sorry for Rueben. I empathized with his frustration throughout the film. I wondered why his parents were so ashamed due to a birth defect which they had no control over. As for the acting I found it refreshing seeing Judy Garland in a serious role and pulling it off with tears and compassion. Burt looked more like a GQ magazine cover model than a headmaster of an institution. His acting was professional yet I felt he was miscast due to his appearance. A thought provoking film that makes you cringe at the sight of the dark side of human existence where these loving children were dealt a bad card by Mother Nature. Today I have a Niece and Nephew who are mentally challenged and discarded by their Father. I take the Father's place and show them love, respect and mostly time together making life more palatable for them. You love your children unconditionally. Furthermore kudos to Stanley Kramer for producing another controversial inspiring film.

mark.waltz It's not difficult to be alternately touched and depressed over this social drama that is arguably the most important film that Judy Garland ever made. As a mother of three (two of them within the age range of children here), she thrived on the love and support from them in the most difficult of times. Over a decade before this film was made, part of her cure was the unconditional love she received from similarly diagnosed children as there are here, particularly one who became highly emotional as she prepared to leave. This is a fictional walk back to her past as her character joins the staff of a special children's school, and instantly becomes involved in the life of the sweet natured Bruce Ritchey who takes a shine to her just by looking into her eyes.As the head of the school, Burt Lancaster is initially reluctant to hire the untrained Garland, but thanks to his assistant (Elizabeth Wilson) agrees to give her a shot. His unorthodox methods shock her, and her almost obsessive love for these children, especially Ritchey. An awkwardly narrated flashback (featuring Gena Rowlands and Steven Hill as his parents) explains the circumstances surrounding his condition. Lancaster goes from being cold and demanding one moment to understanding in others. He's definitely a complex and conflicted man, unsure of the troubled soul that makes Garland latch onto Ritchey, creating for some tense moments and incredible acting from both. The direction of rising independent director John Cassavetes gives this a unique feeling, practically perfect in every way. It's ironic that he was disappointed in the editing of the film, because other than one or two sequences, it flows perfectly naturally. Wife Rowlands gets an amazing sequence with Garland where she reveals her true feelings concerning her son, something I'm sure many parents in this position can relate to. Don't expect a light hearted moment from Judy to lead into song, even though she does briefly sing one song acapella, altering her voice not to sound like a professional, as well as participate in a chorus with the amazing children she's surrounded by. She's a vast quotient of issues, and delivers a most subtle performance, while Lancaster is as passionate here even in his own conflicts as he was in "Elmer Gantry". This is a difficult film to be inspired to even attempt to watch, because the subject matter is even more potent today. These children, often looked on as freaks, have been re-diagnosed with different names and different forms of treatment. The film presents them as gifted in the way of looking at adults in a way others cannot, perhaps revealing truths those being observed do not want revealed. The opening shot of an almost teary eyed Garland lets you know that she is not heading to Oz, to Carvel, to put a show on in a barn, or to ride the trolley to the fair. An extended Thanksgiving play towards the end, as well as a visit to the adult wing of the institution, is frightening. The pageant sequence goes on perhaps a bit too long, but I can see why it was not cut down. Judy really pulls out all the stops in delivering a performance, and at times, it seems as if she's not even acting, but has emerged into the soul of a completely different person. Lancaster may seem overly stern and even unlikable at times, but in the end, you really begin to see his point of view, even if like Garland, you question some of his methods. They seem very natural together. Look for Billy Mumy briefly as one of the kids in Garland's introduction to the crowd and veteran character actress Barbara Pepper as one of the teachers. In a sense, this film was way ahead of its time, a total flop, yet producer Stanley Kramer and director Cassavettes have left behind something truly remarkable.

MartinHafer "A Child Is Waiting" is a film showing the happenings at a state institution for developmentally delayed kids. Back in the bad old days, people were routinely sent to giant state schools to live out their lives. Not only the mentally retarded, but blind, mentally ill, deaf and various disabled adults and kids were routinely sent off to these places--and it was the rare case where they stayed home with their families. This warehousing of these 'defectives' was thought to be best and fortunately for most of these individuals, such mass institutionalization has become a thing of the past (though de-institutionalization offers its own set of problems as well). The school in this film isn't quite a warehouse (you do get to see one later in the film) but it's far from a homelike environment. So, when you watch this movie, understand that it was very typical for the early 1960s--but not today.Burt Lancaster plays a doctor who runs the institution in the film. In some ways, he's very likable and committed and in others he's a very hard individual. He hires a new teacher for the place--an inexperienced by well-meaning lady (Judy Garland). At first, things seem to go well but when the two disagree on how to handle a particularly troubled kid, sparks start to fly. This boy has been abandoned by his family and they never visit him--and Garland is determined to do something to get him to open up and become a happier and higher-functioning resident. She also wants to give her love to the boy. But for Lancaster, pity is not on his agenda--he wants to toughen up the kids--to force them to respond to his less cuddly ways.For me, the story about the one boy is not all that important. To me, what's important is the insight it gives in the treatment and education of developmentally delayed kids--and to show how it was done long ago. to psychology majors, those who work in the field or anyone who lives with and loves someone with developmental delays, it's well worth seeing. A very good film--and you might want to keep a box of Kleenex handy just in case.By the way, one of the kids in the institution was played by Billy Mumy--the same kid who later starred on "Lost in Space" and as an adult on "Babylon 5"--and played the scary kid with freaky powers on "The Twilight Zone". Barbara Pepper who played 'Doris Zipfel' on "Green Acres" plays one of the teachers. Also, Steven Hill plays the disturbed boy's neglectful and rather angry father. He played the original lead on "Mission:Impossible" as well as the original District Attorney on "Law & Order". Finally, this was one of Judy Garland's last films. In 1963, she made this as well as "I Could Go On Singing" before dying so tragically young.

rainbowosmondfan This is an excellent movie with stellar acting, an important subject, and some of the most beautiful children to ever grace the movie screen in it's cast. Burt Lancaster plays a strict but loving and fair director, and Judy Garland plays a naive, but loving teacher. Both were perfect in their roles. The movie is deeply moving and was ahead of it's time. It should be seen by all who work with special children. Some of the reviews here really surprised me, saying that Burt Lancaster's character in this film did not want Judy Garland's character to show love to Rueben. That's not the way I saw it at all. Lancaster's character definitely wanted Judy's to love Rueben. But Judy was, at the beginning, showing pity, not love. She was coddling a boy who could be taught to do things for himself. She was spending all her time with him, excluding the other children. This would eventually have proved harmful to both Rueben and Judy's character, who both would have suffered hurt and loss at being separated from each other.