MovieChat Forums > Invisible Child (1999) Discussion > OMG are they SERIOUS with this movie???

OMG are they SERIOUS with this movie???

posted 20 years ago by loveDetroit
71 replies | jump to latest

OK..I TRIED to watch this movie on Lifetime, and it was so ridiculous I could not even finish!! I love Lifetime movies as much as the next person, and yeah, some of the stories are a little "out there" but this one takes the cake!!

I loved how the Dad and daughter totally pretended to go along with the whole "imaginary child" thing. The best parts were when the Mom would talk to "Maggie" and the camera would just pan to an empty chair, or an empty swing.

So what the hell was wrong with the Mom?? Was she crazy? How in the hell did she start to imagine this child, and why didn't the dad do anything about it??? I REALLY tried to watch the rest, but I just couldn't!!

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] loveDetroit 19 years ago

sorry...I did not know a person had to have a medical degree to watch a Lifetime movie.

I will try to remember this next time.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ericbanafan 19 years ago

wblc2000, I really don't think anniedawg was insulting mentally ill people or QUITE deserved the rant you gave her about the importance of family. anniedawg was in her right on a MOVIE messageboard to questiong the validity of the movie as it was absolutly dire, nonsensical drivel. But that was just my opinion.

Eric Bana is my god .

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] artistathome 16 years ago

I don't believe you are a doctor for one minute. No doctor would have such horrible grammar and spelling...

You are wrong about Annie's illness.
In the first place, John F. Nash was a paranoid schizophrenic. Annie did not have the same problem. Nash created fantasies and believed them.

Annie always knew Maggie was not real and was invisible. She persisted in this fantasy for reasons of her own. No one can know the real reason unless she goes thru therapy and reveals it. she did not need meds. She needed to talk.

This is what the movie lacked. A healthy ending to the story. She needed to reveal either to her husband or a doctor how she was feeling and why she invented this child. otherwise she was not going to get well.

A lot of people are walking around emotionally unhealthy. they cover it up with drugs and alchohol or etc. Those methods don't help anymore than an invisible child.

Ninaskids

[–] equalizer5150 19 years ago

wblc2000, So, what is the name of the medical condition and what is the medication for it?

Many kids have imaginary friends but adults who have imaginary family members are usually schizophrenic and have personality disorder with psychotic features. For people to go along with this is simply enabling the disease and making it worse. Persons like the woman in this movie should be treated in a facility. There is no pill for this as this is not a condition. It is a symptom of a variety of conditions. In other words, there is no condition in the DSM that's symptom is having an imaginary family member.

Dr. Turnincoff

[–] cynkat 19 years ago

TO wblc2000 - YOU expect people to believe you're a doctor? Your tirade is full of misspelled words and your grammar is horrible. Get real. Talk about delusions.

For general discussion: This has to be one of the worst movies ever made. It was so bad it was fascinating. I agree that the welfare of the children must come before any adult issues, and the "real" children of this pathetic couple were the only ones in the family with any sense. As a social worker I know that the investigation by CFS was completely bogus. No actual abuse or neglect was reported here, and the report would never have even been accepted, no matter where the incident took place. Imaginary children may not be healthy, but do not physically harm other children in the family. Neglect? Perhaps, but again the report would have to be much more egregious.

Everything that can be said about the bad acting has been said, but the fact is this movie just wasn't well written. I thought the little girl was good.

[–] ComixComix 17 years ago

Please don't address me as "Dude", Doctor, it's very unprofessional.

Also they should have taught you in Med School that "goes" is not spelled "go's".

[–] quartkn33 17 years ago

wow a doctor should be able to write better

[–] faielyne 14 years ago

To the original poster I would like to say, I KNOW! RIGHT??? For fun, you should watch it to the end because that is even more ridiculous!

Speaking of the end, BK22, if this movie were trying to draw attention to an actual medical condition like multiple personality disorder or schizophrenia, the end wouldn't have been so horrible and unrealistic. The nanny was right to go to social services. I can see a nanny feeling guilty and possibly not knowing what to do, that is the one realistic thing in this movie. But the fact that this movie has the fake kid die and then the mom is just assumed to be fine after that, that is a terrible ending.

To compare this movie to A Beautiful Mind makes me question your sanity, honestly. You're a doctor? In what country DUDE?!!!!!!!!!! No doctor would have a patient's family, especially a family with young children, go along with this. Or are you a doctor from Days of Our Lives? Joey? Is that you?

[–] simba122504 14 years ago

The dad had no choice.

What kind of Doctor are you? lmafo

You're not a *beep* Doctor. If you're a Doctor, I'm richer than both Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.

I'm glad Obama won, but I will not jump on the Pro-Choice bandwagon

[–] WhoAteMyCookie 13 years ago

I know this is an old thread but just saw this movie the other day for the first time. I had to check this out on IMDB to see of others felt the same as me..it was unrealistic and sucked so bad it was funny and you can't turn away.

To the person who claims to be a doctor and has an 8 yr old family member with this same condition: you need to go to medical school to be a doctor, but I would recommend you finish High School specfically paying attention to English first. For a doctor you lack the reality of medical knowledge, terms, and your comparison of illnesses are way off the mark. You would have sounded more credible had you not used DUDE, comparisons of an 8 yr old, and wrote like a professional instead. Formal medical advice would NOT be to say to a family to basically deal with it and play along, rather anyone in the medical field would recognize not only the mental instability of this mother but also the emotional toll it would create for young children and recommend medical intervention. Also a doctor does not have to state they are a doctor to sound credible in the manner in which you stated it. Your diagnosis is like saying to a family your mother is an alcoholic so just let her drink and deal with her alcoholism instead of trying to help her with treatment. You are clueless as to medical intervention and love can only take you so far, if you love a person and know they are unstable you don't let them run around acting like a lunatic you actually love them enough to help them. No matter if that means committing them and letting them heal. Wow what would you say to a patient who thought they had 4 personalities, just go home and let your wife be whoever she wants to be and play along don't worry if one personality hurts the other? Now I digress to the main topic, since the point I make is for a post that is very old (just wanted my say anyways).

This movie lacked the realistic view, in my opinion, simply because they neglected to mention reasons why the child was accepted, what brought about the illusion, how the father/children came to agree with playing along, and any medical intervention that may have been approached but declined. Also who brings in a nanny willingly to help with a fake child, did they not believe this was ever going to create a problem with the people in the "real" world?
Lets just humor the movie for the moment and say ok we understand it is not important to know the background of Maggie: Did this mother favor the invisible child more? Did the family really feel a need to pretend even when the mother was out of the room? Family photos? Holidays? Other family members such as grandparents, did they also go along with this and what explanation for their refusal to disbelieve this imaginary child was the result of a mental illness? Even if you humor the movie it still leaves a lot of unanswered questions and problems with how for 5 years a family could pull this off. So if the father handled everything like enrolling her in school, bringing her to doc. appts, anything that involved the general public did the mother do anything then, was she ever involved with her other children outside the home in dealing with the general public? What mother would not attend their childs school for parent teacher day ever, make any doc appts, bring the child in public to normal things that would require an outsider to be involved in their life?

(\___/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[–] keeley-saunders 19 years ago

I can't help but agree with you. I watched it on uk daytime tv last week as 1) I was ill with flu and 2) it had Victor Garber (who I love from Alias) in it.

As it finished I felt like I had wasted two hours of my life watching it. It really was that bad, wasn't it!?!

And as for the person who seemed to think you were slagging off mental health sufferers as the film was so badly written that there was only one mention I recall where the mom's mental state was discussed (by the dad in the kitchen to the nanny) I'd say it was the film's fault, not yours :)

[–] loveDetroit 19 years ago

LOL thanks for being on my side with this crazy movie :)

By the way, the movie came on Lifetime recently again, so I thought I would give it a second try. AGAIN I had to change the channel...it was so bad!!

And yes, I think you are right...the mom's mental state was only mentioned once in the movie, it's like the dad and the family just decided to just deal with what the mom was doing.
Like, "oh mom's not crazy or anything, she just thinks there is an invisible child walking about, which is perfectly normal". Huh?!

They should have taken her to the doctor!!

[–] ericbanafan 19 years ago

Completly! The characters were so one-dimensional. It's like the writer wrote it on the back of a cigerrette packet or something. Example:

Mom-Crazy
Nanny-(see mary poppins)
Dad-Loves his wife
Daughter-Long-suffering
Son-Clueless
Other Daughter-NOT FRICKIN' THERE!

Absolutly nonsensical, for instance, no-one else EVER noticed that mom had a child that wasn't there??? And the dad was willing to put up with all that because he loved his wife so much that it totally destoyed the family!?! It's just so lazy!

I'm glad other people see this movie for what it is- a tragedy - tragic that it ever got made.

Eric Bana is my god .

[–] loveDetroit 19 years ago

LOL
Your description of the "family" is so dead-on...hilarious!!!

Man this movie was horrible. Watch it become some sort of "cult classic" like "Showgirls" or something...it's so bad, yet it's funny to watch.

ha ha :)

[–] ericbanafan 19 years ago

Yeah, I mean it's hard to articulate what is so awful about this movie it's just...dire. In a way though, it has mae me appreciate bad films because they gotta be better than this dross.

Eric Bana is my god .

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] AtheistRevolution 15 years ago

Mom-Crazy
Nanny-(see mary poppins)
Dad-Loves his wife
Daughter-Long-suffering
Son-Clueless
Other Daughter-NOT FRICKIN' THERE!

LOL! See Mary Poppins.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.

[–] prpryke-1 19 years ago

Maybe if you had watched the entire movie and paid attention, you would understand that Tim loved his wife and did not want to see her institutionalized. I don't understand the harsh criticism of this movie. It is a touching story of family love. The perfomances were wonderful. What would you do with a loved one who had a breakdown. Lock her up? That is not always the answer. Try a little love and compassion.

[–] equalizer5150 19 years ago

prpryke-1, You are right that this is touching at times but the bottom line is, children come first. The father was allowing his children to become emotionally effected out of fear his wife would be taken away. Persons like this would be placed in a facility for a couple of weeks with psychotropic medication and released back home to be monitored. She needed help fixing this problem and fixing the reason she developed this problem.
Once again the child welfare was misrepresented. They can not enter a home without a warrant. They can interview the kids at school without the parents knowledge (But they must be informed within 24 hrs) but without a warrant, CPS couldn't force their way in the home.
It was an entertaining movie. I didn't expect much considering the channel so I wasn't let down, although, I would have liked to have seen her get help the correct way rather than her working it out with more delusions.

[–] xusedxromancexfilthx 17 years ago

Prpryke-1:
If he loved her he would have got her some help. Instead, he let her go around living in the dreamworld.He must not have loved the kids too much making thejm live through all that crap.

♡

[–] fiatlux-1 14 years ago

Tim loved his wife and did not want to see her institutionalized.

Its fine and good to love your wife. But she was REALLY sick! She needed help, not humoring or enabling.

What would you do with a loved one who had a breakdown. Lock her up? That is not always the answer.

Um...yes! In this case, this woman seriously needed a stay at a psychiatric facility. And after watching this film, I think the whole FAMILY needed a stay! Who would put their kids through that?! Making them believe a sister is there that isn't, and died no less....how sick is that?!
You can love someone terribly but that doesn't mean you don't get them the help they need if they are sick!

"I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus."
"Didn't he discover America?"
"Penfold, shush."

[–] MovieBuff1414 19 years ago

OMG! this is gonna be HUGE in cult movies. i'm really into that stuff, so i'm actually watchin it right now.the father in it was a TERRIBLE actor!!! the nanny had to be one of the most bland, boring, stereotypical characters.the only good one was the little boy! it was a little interesting to see how it affected him, but the rest of the characters are AWFULLLLLL! i knew where the movie was going when i heard the line "i'm singing to your heart" come out of the mom's mouth.

so delicsiously awful!

[–] freefall79 19 years ago

no the warst bit is when the dad is having a conversatation with the little girl who "dying" and says i wish i could see you! besides that the film was ok

Thunderbirds Aren't Slow

[–] cdfacts 18 years ago

If there is ONE person who defends this movie on these message boards, they are obviously the one with the chemical imbalance. I just finished watching this movie a few mins ago on Lifetime. This was the 2nd time I had to watch it for the fact that the first time I saw it, I was so confused why they would make a movie like this, I HAD to see it a second time to see if this was REALLY what I had just seen. My favorite part of the movie to mock was when he asked the doctor for a lollipop for his daughter outside, just to fool his wife. HAHA. This movie was a waste of time (Twice). I may have to see it a 3rd time to make sure I'm actually getting this rediculous story plot or to see if I'm the one with the chemical imbalance.

"I know exactly where your body is, what I'm looking for is some indication of a brain"

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

i just watched and the whole way through i was like, huh? I mean, okay, the mum is sick, as in mentally ill, maybe schizophrenic or something else, im not a doctor so i dont know..i could buy that;
what if there was a family who's mum was mentally ill and 'invented' this little girl...if the film had begun with her 'inventing' the kid and it was about the how family suddenly had to cope with it- or had only been coping for a few months when the nanny turned up, that would have been a little more believable...they could have had her actually going to a shrink and ending up medicated, and Maggie 'dying' could have been the medication taking effect and her brains way of dealing with the correction of the chemical imbalance, i mean her death in the film as is was clearly her brain shutting down the hallucination, but it would have been more believable to have it being a sudden occurence, the fact that they expect us to buy that its been going on for at least five or six years...what the hell?!

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

lol, gawd could you imagine a sequel?!Teeheeheee,they would have to make it a smellovision movie and give all the viewers scratch and sniff cards dosed with Acid or LSD to make em buy into it!

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

LMFAO!!!Not at the child abuse but at the rest of it, and yeah, shouldnt her whole reality hve crumbled when she saw there where no photo's of the kid or are we supposed to assume that her fantasy extended to her include imaginary photographs too?ANd what about homework? Do kids that age in the states get any home work, ours n the UK do, obviously dead simple stuff but if americans do, would she sit there and do imaginary homework too? And are also supposed to believe that her own kids have absolutely no friends whatsoever who would say something, or who's parents would have said something? And...just...gah, absolutely none of it made sense!!GAH!!

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

hehehe, i thought that bit was funny though, Mae Whitman kicks ass, i loved the way the social worker was like 'you have an invisible sister' and Mae was like, 'oh good idea', heheheheee! But yeah, she totall warped her kids, what happens when Sam starts goin 'i have a sister whi died' the friends are gonna be like, oh can i see a photo...whats he gonna do??lol

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] redmoitchard 18 years ago

NANDER

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

yeah, if the mum was that convinced the kid was real...why didnt she want to sue the doctor at the hospital or something??Surely in her mind, HE is the one who didnt look after the kid well enough???
What does NANDER mean if you'll forgive my ignorance?

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

LMFAO means Laughing My F ucking Ass Off,hehehe, its a way of beating the censors, tee heeee!!
Gawd do you think she would go whole hog and stuff a jumper up her dress and make them pretend to deliver the baby at home? You know, im surprised no one ever tried to mess with her, like pretended to drop kick Maggie or say they shaved the kids hair and painted her head purple or something. I so would have had to screw with her head, i know its evil but jesus she was askin for it!

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

LMFAO!!!Curiosity strikes, bottomless one?...but thats the beauty of the space button, you can swear and the cant censor you, mwahahahaahahahah!!!!!!!!
God do you think she'd even imagine home video's of the kid? How far do the writers expect us to take this, cos im willing to point out every single little thing thats wrong with it, and damn i'll enjoy it.

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

ooooh, cos i would totally not expect people to believe the bull they throw at us, mwahahahahahahaha!!!

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] noodlepie54 18 years ago

DAMN!! i thought i had it then too!

some people are just amateur Taco eaters

[–] tiffanykk2002 17 years ago

I'm late, but this movie is complete garbage. I think everyone covered what was wrong with it I can't believe this movie was actually made. It was the most absurd thing I have ever seen. Burying your daughter in the backyard? Were the writers too lazy to deal with how the funeral home would question what was going on here? And the so-called father didn't want the wife to be committed so he let this crap go on for five years?? Are we sure that this isn't a comedy? I'm tempted to buy it and show people, so that we can spend two hours laughing. Wow.

[–] noodlepie54 17 years ago

actually maybe it was and we missed that!!!

well damn if it was a comedy all along i take back everythin, lmfao!!!

'You should be careful what you say...Damn is more than just a word'

[–] Blake4014 17 years ago

Never heard of the term, "you have to be firm to be kind". The dad and daughter by carrying on this silliness only futher helped to reenforce the mothers delusion of another child. And they should of just told her straight out that she's going flippin crazy and if she didnt stop, they'd shop her to the lunatic asylum. That would of woken her out of her stupid delusion.

[–] noodlepie54 17 years ago

did you see this on channel five today??

i saw it on and was gonna come on here but i was laughin too hard at the sheer stupidty and couldnt work the key board.

All i could think was, its been FIVE YEARS of this *beep* we're supposed to believe that no one at all has ever noticed the insanity?!

'You should be careful what you say...Damn is more than just a word'

[–] Blake4014 17 years ago

yeh I saw it on channel 5 this evening. It was certainly a stupid movie lol.

[–] noodlepie54 17 years ago

hehee, it was, it was like...it was almost embarassing to watch the actors having to waffle around with this non existant kid

'You should be careful what you say...Damn is more than just a word'

[–] SayNoToRemakes 17 years ago

After reading everyone's posts asking the same questions I have been wondering about this movie, it finally came to me. What they didn't show us is the dad was taking care of things like talking to the funeral home, registering Maggie for school, etc. I had wondered why a loving mom (although disturbed) would bury her kid in the backyard without a coroner's report, embalming, etc. since that's totally illegal. Dad probably 'talked' to the funeral home and took care of everything. He probably 'registered' the child for school, told mom he talked to the teachers, etc. If they had shown more of this kind of stuff going on, it would be more believable that something like this could have gone on for 5 years. The mom seems pretty dependent, so it's understandable that she would have believed anything dad told her. The directors could have made this movie more believable. I'm not really sure what they were thinking.

[–] shannon-118 17 years ago

I just saw this last night and had to try to find some explanation for it on the web.

Why did they never explain why this happened? I kept expecting some sort of explanation; like she had an affair and miscarried, so she invented this child.

The burying in the back yard was just ridiculous since the mother was so adement about the child being real.

I've seen worse movies, but this was one of the weirdest.

[–] SayNoToRemakes 17 years ago

The movie never came right out and told us why this happened. Someone mentioned on here that she might have made up the child since the dad was away working so much. In the movie, the dad mentioned he thought when they had Sam she would get over the invisible child, but that didn't happen. I guess we're supposed to either figure that part out or just accept it.

[–] MissMargoChanning 17 years ago

I totally agree with everyone here. This movie is a train wreck! I watched more or less, the other morning as I was getting ready for work. I`d never seen it before, but I like Rita Wilson and Victor Garber, and the discription on the channel guide had me curious. What a bunch of nonesense! Still, like that train wreck, you can`t look away.
The investigation of the social services woman was screwy. I could`nt help thinking " Sure! she`ll go to this beautiful home to check out this loving family with an imaginary child..... Screw the child beaters! We have a serious situation on our hands! Get a warrent! Get the cops!!!"
I`m not saying that the situation was a healthy one for the children. It would`nt be, but the way this whole thing was dealt with, in this movie, was just ridiculous! The father, daughter, and the nanny jumping and giggling outside the social services office? "We sure fooled THEM!"
The mother was never interviewed??? That should have ben the FIRST thing they insisted on!
I did`nt get to finish watching this because I had to go to work, so I have no idea of what happened with the mother. Somebody here said the imaginary kid "died???"
I`ll say this for Lifetime movies. They suck you in, and all the while, you know it`s bad, but you can`t stop watching. In the end, you`re always left feeling a bit foolish. I`ll never learn.
I have to wonder what the actors were thinking..... to them, I suppose it`s just a job.

[–] quiteclassically 17 years ago

yeah, that's why the daughter was fat!
I LOVED the scene with the girl talking about Santa Claus and Martin Luther King Jr. My friends and I were cheering for her. She was the only person in the movie we liked.

[–] kmjd9203 17 years ago

yeah, this movie was pretty out there; to say the least. haha

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]