MovieChat Forums > My Kid Could Paint That (2007) Discussion > One telling scene in defense of parents.

One telling scene in defense of parents.

posted 15 years ago by CathyE
5 replies | jump to latest

Something that stuck out for me - do you remember, fairly early on, they interview an art teacher that says the parents wanted her to teach Marla, but she refused, basically saying she didn't want to interfere with Marla's genius?

Well, what if she had said yes? I think it would have been clear to any art teacher pretty quickly if Marla had no talent, and didn't actually paint the paintings.

If dad was faking it, that was a pretty risky move on his part.

I still don't know what to think. I believe the mother, but I don't think I believe the father. He looks awfully nervous and shifty in the doc. Time will tell.

“I always tell the truth…even when I lie” - Scarface

[–] shadow_priest_x 14 years ago

That's a good point.

As for the father, some people just get nervous and wilt under pressure and he had the spotlight on him in a bad way. Even if he was being 100% honest, it's entirely reasonable that he was also extremely uncomfortable.

Just imagine if you were on trial for a murder that you did not commit. Would you really believe in the system so thoroughly that you would not be afraid that you would be convicted anyway?

I remember a specific scene--perhaps the final interview, not entirely sure--where Marla's father says something along the lines of, "How do you direct a 4-year-old to paint abstractly? You can't really do it. . ." And he seemed very genuine both in tone and facial expression.

I think everyone who is so eager to crucify these people are being entirely unfair. I would love to see how they would handle it if they were in a similar situation as the Olmsteads.

[–] twelvepointnine 14 years ago

Don't you think the art teacher was asked for her opinion after Marla became known for "her" "art"? Also, a decent art teacher doesn't learn his students to become artists, that's something that can't be taught, but guides the student into understanding his work and become his own most ruthless critic. Unless the art the teacher promotes is like the photorealistic drivel the gallery holder prefers.

Chaos reigns

[–] CathyE 14 years ago

That the teacher was approached after Marla became known is precisely my point.

If Marla's paintings are a hoax, perpetrated by the parents, as many believe, and Marla is really just as average child with average skills, then the art teacher surely would have found that out if she had agreed to give her lessons, or guidance, or simply watched her paint - whatever an art teacher does.

That's why I said it was a risky move on the father's part, if it's true Marla doesn't actually paint her paintings.

“I always tell the truth…even when I lie” - Scarface

[–] star_power 14 years ago

Seeing as these people had a money making scam on the go don't you think they are not averse to bunging certain people a couple of bucks to lie and make up cute stories of events that may not have happened for the press and the camera? Also this was a small town. Is it not possible that even without some complicity or some deal with the parents that when a student who was to be entering her class comes to her as a big international celebrated art genius a simple ordinary art teacher would be awed and intimidated enough by the genius tag and the fame that she might be more inclined to decline. And not much of a risk if when speaking to her about these lessons he doesn't really want the teacher to give the father was speaking in the right language and giving off the right vibe to make her unsure and decline so as not to risk being responsible for tampering with the fragile budding genius of the world famous golden goose. She'd obviously not want to be in the papers as the woman responsible, the woman who destroyed a young artist and wiped out her genius with her rudimentary common teaching methods that made the kid paint like every other ordinary not especially gifted kid. Have the dad put this to her or make her think about this with the questions he asks and scenarios he paints and she'd decline to tamper with it most likely. Makes the story better when he says he attempted to get an outsider involved with Marla's supposed painting ability and it wasn't always planned to be only him who would be the sole witness to the full extent of what Marla can and can't paint.

[–] CathyE 14 years ago

I don't know what money making scam you're talking about.

I suppose it's possible the teacher was paid to lie, though I find that more far fetched than if she was simply asked and declined, as depicted.

I suppose the father could have used intimidating language (?) to "scare" the art teacher away from giving lessons, but that's not the impression I got from my viewing, and I don't know if I would assume the teacher would decline if I were the father- that it would be the most likely scenario.

I take issue with your assessment of the teacher as a "simple ordinary art teacher", just because she's in a small town. We never get her qualifications, I don't think, but it's unfair to assume she's mediocre, just because she doesn't live in New York or something.

Finally, was the girl "world famous" when the teacher was asked to give lessons? I can't remember (been a while since I watched this), but I seem to recall she was asked pretty early on.

“I always tell the truth…even when I lie” - Scarface