Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Lee Eisenberg Eugene Fedorenko's Oscar-winning "Every Child" got created with the help of UNICEF, which had declared 1979 the Year of the Child. The short focuses on a baby abandoned by successive families until one adopts her. I don't know how many children there are in foster homes today, but it almost certainly violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child. To be certain, indigenous children are disproportionately represented in Canada's foster care system (I assume that the same is true in the US).I recommend this short. Partly a look at children's rights, it also brings up another point. How do we reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies? Countless people rail against abortion but don't offer a solution to prevent unwanted pregnancies. If not abortion, then what?

MartinHafer Here in the 21st century, we are quite spoiled when it comes to cartoons. The lousy quality cartoons of the 60s and 70s are long gone and computer generated shorts and full-length films are the norm--and people have come to expect gorgeous quality animation. Well, back in 1979, things obviously were NOT of the high standards of either today or during the heyday of Hollywood's animation in the 40s and 50s--as EVERY CHILD looks amazingly poor for an Oscar winning animated short. Many art students today can make far superior products thanks to fantastic rendering software--and this one sure needed something! The story begins with two men and a baby sitting in a sound room. One of the men begins entertaining the kid and the scene suddenly becomes animated. The rest of the film frankly bored me--mostly because of the animation but probably even more because the sound effects were these two guys who just made noises like audience members chosen to appear on "Whose Line is it Anyway?". This was not a pleasant experience and I truly wonder if the 3 was perhaps a bit too generous!

MephitisLotor That this short won the Academy Award for Best Animated Short should be conclusive proof that the Academy can prefer political or sociological content over quality. The animation itself is OK, except for ugly character designs and a style that varies inconsistently between sophisticated and childish. The sound is interesting, as Les Mimes Électriques provide all the sound effects in the cartoon using just their voices, and masking anything that might be dialogue as incoherent mumbling. Unfortunately, what passes for the story, however well-intentioned it may be, is both preachy and banal, as a baby is abandoned on a succession on doorsteps, with no one able to find room in their lives to take her in, until she ends up at a dump where a couple of homeless people decide to care for her. Apparently the makers of this cartoon think that simply being in favor of children having good homes is a strong enough social statement to build a cartoon around.(And while it didn't affect my rating, the obvious subtext that the poor are more humane (or, indeed, more human) than the wealthy or the middle class is annoying, as both a stereotype and a cliché.)

Pammit Made for the UN International Year of the Child, I saw this short almost twenty years ago at a theatre in Frankfurt Germany. It was played before the main feature. I have longed to see it again because it was so funny. Fans of animation should catch this classic! Funny for all ages.