the audience applauded

Captivating movie !

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

If these walls could talk (1996) is a TV movie made in an episodic way. This movie examines the issue of abortion throughout very different time periods. The first time period that this movie takes on is 1952, before Roe v Wade, when abortion was illegal. The star of this first of three episodes is Demi Moore, one of my favorite actresses. Moore does a really good job with this role. You can really feel her raw emotion and her pain. It portrayed back alley abortion that women were unfortunately forced to undergo if they wanted to terminate a pregnancy. The next episode is set in 1974, just about a year or so after abortion was legalized in the Supreme Court. Sissy Spacek stars in this segment, I love her and her movies, and she does a great job here, very realistic portrayal of a woman already with 4 kids, mulling over the tough decision of whether or not to have an abortion. The third segment is set in what was modern day when this was released, 1996. This portion of the movie stars Anne Heche, Cher, and Jada Pinkett. I really loved this portion especially because of its realisticness and it's very raw portrayal. Heche was just perfect in the role, loved her. Pinkett was hard to love because of how her character is, but nevertheless she did a good job. Cher, who is both a fantastic singer and actress, does a great job at playing one of the most caring characters I've seen. I loved how they showed the realities women have had to go through simply to have an abortion. In each section, they continually painted such a raw portrayal of this issue and I applaud the filmmakers for doing so. 9/10!

At age 14 when if these walls could talk, came out I felt the intensity of the plots and characters. Then I had seen abortion as very selfish. Demi's character has casual sex, out of loneliness and grief sure, instead of protecting her child she selfishly brutalized herself and child to save face. The middle aged woman, selfish. Woman die of ab these days and don't forget about all of the unborn females aborted. Hypocrisy. Ab is not about woman's rights, and I am a woman. Ab is about convenience, greed and selfishness. Even though ab brings suffering to many who were misguided and coerced. Woman's rights are about protecting, not slaughtering a 'pregnancy'. As I've grown I have more compassion for post ab woman as most were naive or manipulated or even forced by threats and lack of support. Ab as a whole is grossly out of the realm of 'womans rights'. And I know this still even through living around corruption and harm in my naivety and adulthood. I think this movie has a great potential to misguide. It is a fragment of the bigger picture. But still captivating, good acting.

First of all, I want to thank fayR for calling a spade a spade: I'm pro-abortion, period. I believe all three women should've aborted. I gave this film a nine because, as testified to at I'mNotSorry.net, I don't believe it's true that all women who find themselves pregnant and don't want to be agonize over it; and neither do I believe that having an abortion necessarily affects a woman negatively or for a long period of time. For that I'm grateful for the character in the middle segment who admits to having felt relieved after aborting. Hard for me to believe that relief isn't the Number One sensation felt by a woman after undergoing a safe, effective abortion. No, it will not haunt you for the rest of your days, and this needs to be said.I also thank Merwyn Grote, though we sit on opposing sides of this issue, for submitting the only review that actually looked beyond the surface to see the message. The message I got, however, differs from the one Grotes saw: What I saw was the horror of conservative backlash. The only character who had access to a safe, legal abortion without getting mobbed or firebombed was the 1970s one. Our society passed through a blip of progressiveness that lasted about a decade, and that's what I find the most disturbing thing this movie showed. Every viewer should agree with that.Veering a little off-topic here, but I never understood why back-alley abortionists couldn't take the extra minute to wash their hands and disinfect their instruments. It's not as if it added to their overhead. What motivated this pond scum? Money? OK. But he already got paid! What harm could it have done to swab some alcohol onto the speculum? Tom in the 1950s segment was the one who deserved to be shot. Where are all the indignant anti-abortion voices when it comes to him and his ilk -- and don't think they don't still exist. The state of Wyoming has not a single legal abortion provider. Who do you suppose is performing abortions in Wyoming?

((((SPOILERS))))Among the characters in IF THESE WALLS COULD TALK, there is a doctor, an abortionist, played by Cher. We know she is a doctor because she is wearing a white smock, but even so she looks like Cher, just as if she were taking a break between concerts. She meets a fan, er, uh, a patient, who wants an abortion. Oozing with sympathy and sweetness, Cher shows us just what a wonderful, life affirming operation an abortion can be.In the film we also meet a couple of people who are against abortion. One is played by Eileen Brennan as a sweet, lovable, bubble-headed idiot. The other is a man who is portrayed as a raving maniac who burst into Cher's cozy little abortion clinic and wildly starts shooting people.Now, ya got that? Abortion equals Cher, glamor, female bonding. Anti-abortion means bubble headed idiots and homicidal maniacs. That is the level on which this simplistic little movie works.The sad thing about this film is not that it is so obviously pro-abortion, but that it has so little faith in its beliefs that it won't even try to deal with the issue with any honesty. I have little doubt that all involved made the film with the firm conviction that they were being bold and courageous in revealing the "truth" about a controversial issue. The fact that they believe this is sadder still.The film doesn't even come close to dealing with the conflicts -- morally, ethically, philosophically -- that swarm around the issue of abortion. The filmmakers want us to know that there are dozens, hundreds, thousands of reasons for a woman to have an abortion; but they won't even allow for the possibility that there might be even one single logical reason for an unborn child to have the right to live. The film doesn't want to deal with questions of when life begins, or if a fetus has value beyond being the property of the mother, or if society should have the right to protect all life, or if abortion is anything other than a simple act of selfishness. In short, the film doesn't want to defend itself in any debate where it might not win. Pity a woman in a dilemma? Of course. Pity a child thought to be disposable? Huh, what? Don't know what you're talking about.The film rather smugly expresses pity for the grandmothers and mothers who never had abortion as an option, missing the obvious irony that if those women had that option, the makers of this film might not even exist to produce this propaganda. How many of these women exist because the law recognized their value and protected them?This film makes me think of DEAD MAN WALKING, a film about the death penalty. Tim Robbins, the director and writer of that film, apparently opposes the capital punishment, but his film honestly takes a look at the issue from every angle and neither patronizes nor trivializes any side of the controversy. Robbins gets his message across, but has enough faith in his belief that he doesn't resort to cheap sentimentality or manipulation, plus he assumes the audience is smart enough to decide for themselves what is morally right. The same cannot be said for IF THESE WALLS COULD TALK; it assumes it needs to pander to its audience. In a way, WALLS is anti-woman; it takes for granted that women are victims and seems to assume that women will just be confused if exposed to opposing view points. WALLS is just -- you should pardon the expression -- preaching to the choir. It is designed to spoon feed comforting self-righteousness to pro-abortion supporters. Yes, women are victims. 'Nuf said! Anyone who disagrees need not watch.