ScoobyWell Great visuals, story delivers no surprises

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

claremarie-93830 I am very confused by a lot of the reviews of this movie; most of the people seem like they didn't actually take the time to watch it, and just wrote a review because of how triggered the subject matter makes them feel. Let me make this clear, this movie is NOT anti-vaccination; the message of this movie is entirely focused on one vaccine, called the MMR vaccine, and its very clear links to autism. The movie even takes the time to specify that the Measles vaccine, Mumps vaccine, or Rubella vaccine are SAFE on their own, but that the vaccine with all three of them combined (MMR) was the one deemed unsafe by many authorities and tests. The reason for the cover-up by the CDC is explained in the movie, so at this point I just highly, highly suggest you watch it. This movie plays a powerful role in educating its viewers on understanding what vaccinations really are, and why it's important to know what they are, without negating how important they are.

M34 But if you have any grounding in science you will recognize this "documentary" for the tripe that it is.

zad-16290 The problem with advocacy documentaries is that they control the horizontal, they control the vertical - you see only the side the creators want you to see. And they get to control the non-intellectual aspects as well - evoke emotions. So you need to do your own research, in two areas. 1) Content - does the movie present both sides of a controversy accurately and with a good attempt at balance and context, and 2) Are the producers (who are inherently picking and choosing what to show you) credible as sources you can trust to exercise that discretion.I urge anyone considering this film as information for making a decision or choosing an opinion about the truth to seriously read about the history of Andrew Wakefield - the full set of charges made against him and considered judgements rendered against him, not just the selected subset he attempts to discount on the movie's website. It's harder to find a larger trashfire than his professional reputation and trying to excuse all of his credibility problems as manufactured by a pharma/government/medical conspiracy takes one down the typical rabbithole of conspiracy theory. On the content side, we have Wakefield's study of 12 children (later retracted by the Journal and repudiated by co-authors after fraudulent data and undisclosed conflicts of interest were revealed, versus a number of studies around the world involving hundreds of thousands, most not involving the CDC, etc. The film can only appear credible if you limit yourself to only what it wants you to see; if you read diverse sources, it falls apart.So let's talk about it not as a "documentary" presenting the suppressed truth, but as an advocacy film, perhaps a propaganda film - just as we can analyze wartime propaganda films from all sides. This site is supposed to be about the films, right?It's not very well made. If you are already convinced, you'll give it a 8-10 based on your agreement with it's premise, not on the quality of the film. If you disagree with the premise, you'll give it a 1 on that basis. However I'll give it a 3 (since I can't give 2.5) *as a film*. It will be quite persuasive for some minority of viewers through it's appeal to anti-corporate and anti-government and anti-science/expert sentiments, and the compelling sadness of the parents dealing with ASD may give it emotional legs.However, I can't see any reason to watch this film EXCEPT as a study of propaganda techniques. If you have an open mind about the subject, you will not come away with complete facts but only one distorted perspective with emotional potentiation; if you have enough interest in the subject matter to read, you can find all the assertions (and their extensive counterpoints) online. This biased presentation will only confuse your search for balanced truth. If you have already made up your mind either way, the film won't change it. On the other hand, if you love conspiracies, your rating might be higher even if you were previously unaware of the vaccination controversy (unlikely).

brianlatham Andrew Wakefield (he's no longer a doctor as he was struck off for ethics violations) attempts to create a career for himself in lecture tours with this false nonsense. There have been multiple studies into MMR involving 100,000s of children since the crisis and there is no evidence of a link. Any child with autism already had it, they cannot get it from the inoculation. Anyone who doesn't vaccinate their child is a menace to society and should be charged with child neglect.