El día que requisaron a los niños

Título original: The Last Child

Película de TV
1971
1h 13min

PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb

TU PUNTUACIÓN

Michael Cole and Janet Margolin in El día que requisaron a los niños (1971)

Añade un argumento en tu idiomaIn a badly-overpopulated future, where each couple is only allowed one child and where people over 65 are forbidden medical care under a very draconian set of laws, a young couple, pregnant ... Leer todoIn a badly-overpopulated future, where each couple is only allowed one child and where people over 65 are forbidden medical care under a very draconian set of laws, a young couple, pregnant with their second child (the first died shortly after birth) enlist the help of an elderly... Leer todoIn a badly-overpopulated future, where each couple is only allowed one child and where people over 65 are forbidden medical care under a very draconian set of laws, a young couple, pregnant with their second child (the first died shortly after birth) enlist the help of an elderly former US Senator to help them escape to Canada.

Ver la información de la producción en IMDbPro

PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb

6,6/10

254

TU PUNTUACIÓN

Ver la información de la producción en IMDbPro

Premios
- 1 nominación en total

Imágenes1

Reseñas de usuarios16

6,6254

Reseñas destacadas

7Tex_Arcana

Before Roe. . .

Before Roe v. Wade, and the pro-abortion cult became the state's approved PC religion, the ABC Movie-of-the-Week folks turned out this surprisingly prophetic film. Set in a time when the American democracy had devolved into fascism, and personal freedom was little more than a cliche, this was intended to be a look into a bizarre futuristic world, something like "Brave New World". Nearly thirty years later, that future seems right around the corner.

eugenia_loli

I don't agree with this film

I am an anti-overpopulation believer. I believe that harsh laws will eventually be put into place in the future, be it 1-child per family or 2-children per family (it doesn't matter how many, point is, there will have to be a restriction at some point).

What I don't like about this movie is that they tried to make it look justified by introducing two elements that are not realistic: the forbidding of medically treating old people and the fact that the couple had a child before that died. I am pretty sure that if overpopulation becomes a problem, old people will be continued to be medically treated AND families that they lost their first child will be allowed to have a second chance.

But because overpopulation restrictions might actually make sense, the writers of the movie tried to give justification to their own knee-jerk reaction kind of movie by adding non-realistic, *truly* fascistic elements in it. That's what bothers me with the plot.

9planktonrules

Another bleak view of the overpopulated future from the early 1970s.

In the late 60s and early 70s, folks in the US started worrying about overpopulation. This led to a few films set in the near future where society is a dystopian nightmare--where there are just too many people and not enough resources (such as "Soylent Green"). In "The Last Child", this overpopulation has led to a terrible time where folks are limited to only one birth AND folks over 65 are refused medical care...all in an effort to deal with the ever- expanding population.

When the film begins, you see that a young couple (Michael Cole and Janet Margolin) are expecting a child. The problem is she already had one...and even though it died shortly after birth, they are forbidden by law to have the second one. So they must hide and hope they aren't discovered. Unfortunately, a cop (Ed Asner) catches on and arrests her...and they're planning on sterilizing the poor lady and destroying the child! What comes next is a cross-country race to try to get to safety in Canada...and help from a couple very unlikely sources.

This film is bleak...but also exceptionally well done. It's a tense drama and works very, very well. I was particularly impressed by Van Heflin in his final role--he was exceptional. My only proviso is that some people might just find it too bleak.

8hofnarr

from a high school assignment to 40 years in the future

There were two required courses my freshman year in high school that I recall for one or two reasons - "Comparative Economic Systems" I remember for the example of the price of hula hoops in regards to supply and demand and fads, et cetera. If the book is still being published a reference to the Coen brothers "The Hudsucker Proxy" would be a good update. As for "Comparative Political Systems" I vaguely remember something about the Kwakiutl Indians, but what remains sharply in focus 40 years later was the result of the assignment to watch this film.

If it seemed somewhat fantastic [3. imaginary or groundless in not being based on reality; foolish or irrational: fantastic fears] then, 40 years later it's not so unrealistic. While "death panels" are not mentioned per se in the film, cutting off medical aid to folks over 65 can be problematic if you're diabetic - as was the character of Senator Quincy George played by Emmett Evan Heflin Jr, and, as the trivia section notes "This TV movie was Van Heflin's final performance. He died of a heart attack three months before the original broadcast..." BTW - to avoid a spoiler don't read all of the trivia - I've truncated it so the spoiler doesn't show.

I don't want to write much more without seeing it again - memories of films forty years past may not be entirely reliable - but it made quite an impression on a young teenager raised in an extremely conservative environment. I've read most if not all of Philip Kindred Dick's short stories written in the 1950's and wonder at how prescient he was with many of them. "The Last Child" was the first produced script by Peter S. Fischer, to my knowledge. He won an Edgar Allan Poe Award for an episode of "Murder, She Wrote" and several Emmy nominations for other of these episodes. He would go on to work with the director, John Llewellyn Moxey, on a number of the "Murder, She Wrote," episodes.

storman

Not as good as other John Llewellyn Moxey TV movies!

I just never bought into this story. Even though I agree with the stories subtle premise, that some time in the future, Population Control will be necessary for the survival of the human race. The other part of this movies premise was just not believable. The fact that this couple had to run from the Population Control Police, because they were going to have a second child, even though the first child died at just over 1 year old, seems a little too extreme, and made it hard for me to buy into. This movie seemed too one sided and more of a political statement about one's rights, rather than dealing equally with the serious questions of Overpopulation. Not as good as the other classic TV-movies directed by John Llewellyn Moxey, the Master of 70's TV-Movies & Pilots (Genesis II, Night Stalker, Kung Fu, A Taste of Evil, etc.)

Argumento

Editar

¿Sabías que...?

Editar

Curiosidades
Peter S. Fischer, later a very prolific TV writer and producer, made his television scriptwriting debut with this TV movie.

Citas
Doctor Young: I'm Doctor Young. I suppose this might seem very frightening and confusing to you but, er. let me assure you that no one here is going to hurt you. In a sense we're here to help.
Doctor Young: Now then, you came here from Syracuse?
Alan Miller: Yes, the last year. After our first child died.
Doctor Young: Yes, I see - Miller baby, female. She was only 15 days old. That's unfortunate. Yet, I observe from Mrs. Miller's condition that the mandatory hysterectomy wasn't performed?
Alan Miller: Well, we made the appeals to the government office, and no one would listen so we just decided it was hopeless and left town to move down here.
Doctor Young: I understand. Not a very palatable law is it? Perhaps if we'd practised planned parenthood in the past, it wouldn't be necessary. But now it's the law. One child per family. No more. And no exceptions.
Alan Miller: But our baby's dead.
Doctor Young: After having lived longer than ten days. The law's very specific, Mr. Miller. I know how unfair this must seem to you. The child is gone, now your wife is facing an operation that will end her ability to bear children. Not so sure I wouldn't have done the same thing, if I'd been in your place. Now, when is the child expected, Mrs. Miller?
Karen Miller: The end of November.
Doctor Young: Hmm-mm. Have you been experiencing any pains of any kind? Or any difficulties?
Karen Miller: No.
Doctor Young: Good. Now, we're at a very difficult period in the pregnancy, Mrs. Miller. I suppose we could bring on a miscarriage. But at this point, that always carries a danger to the mother. On the other hand, we could wait until the child is actually delivered and then immediately dispose of it.
Alan Miller: Disposal? You're not talking about a piece of garbage.
Doctor Young: I'm sorry. I apologise, I didn't mean it to sound that way. Now look, both of you, I promise you, there is no pain for the baby. There's no life to speak of really, it's just a fleeting moment. It's all done with kindness. Quickly, efficiently.
Alan Miller: You're murdering a baby, but you're doing it kindly?
Doctor Young: We don't think of it as murdering. We simply can't let...
Alan Miller: You're taking a human life. That is murder. Every human being has the right to live.
Doctor Young: No, Mr. Miller. You're wrong. In this day and age, not every human being has a right to live. You and your wife knew that when you conceived this child. You're free to go, Mr. Miller. Mrs. Miller will have to remain with us. We simply have to make sure that you don't disappear again. You'll find it very comfortable here, I assure you.
Alan Miller: Can I ask you a question? Do you sleep at night?
Doctor Young: Sometimes. If it's of any help to you Mr. Miller, sometimes with vast difficulty.