FrogGlace In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

Iseerphia All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

ffreemon What is the message of this film? It is hard to watch all these kids who have been dealt a bad hand. One expects Burt Lancaster to pull out his automatic and start blasting bad guys. Eventually it becomes obvious this is not possible. But those of us raised by Hollywood expect miracle cures of at least some of these kids. The great ending involves a skit put on by the children for their parents. The kids are so brilliant, Judy Garland tries so hard to bring out their best. What is the message? You must play the hand you are dealt. A re-deal is not possible; life has no Mulligans. The kids do their very best and the parents enjoy their accomplishment with limited abilities. One of the actors has a striking resemblance to the girl who plays his daughter in the film; I bet she is his real daughter.

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.

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.

keoldham Many of the comments here have mentioned Dr. Clark's (Lancaster) belief that the children should not be given love (which would indeed be heinous). I saw it a different way. I didn't think he objected to love so much as coddling and not enforcing a gentle discipline; the first time we see him in the institution with Reuben (Ritchie) and Reuben misbehaves, he applies discipline - which to Miss Hanson (Garland) seems unkind and extreme. Her wish is to protect the children from the world - from all hurts, all responsibilities. Clark even states that without learning some sort of discipline, the children have no hope of learning anything else.Miss Hanson's philosophy is echoed in Reuben's father's (Hill) wish to remove Reuben from the institution and have him privately cared for, where he could have anything he wants, and didn't "have to do anything he didn't want to." As a former educator, I think it's possible to truly love your students and show them that you do, without foregoing the gentle discipline it will take to help them prepare for the world.As a film, I wasn't too impressed. I too felt that Garland's performance was lacking and that she looked older than her years, though her sedate performance did seem to fit in with the character she was playing. I felt that several scenes were either mechanisms for forwarding Miss Hanson's "education," or devices to elicit sympathy. Still, it was a very thought-provoking film.