We all know the subject by now. What baffled me was how so much time was spent on seeking answers to the questions: why and how did this happen? A relationship between a 13 year old boy and a woman in her thirties may appeal to the fantasy of a teenager but is not normal to any adult who upholds even a relative set of moral values. What was not sufficiently stressed in this movie was the premise that teachers either male or female are responsible for their students and may never abuse the trust parents put in them.I have taught teenage girls and realize all too well that their Lolita-like and often teasing ways can be very charming even enticing.A teacher's duties are to teach and educate and he or she who abuses children of any age, not only smears the teaching profession but causes irreparable harm.Therefore, the movie's theme was not an issue at all: Mary Kay was guilty of abuse and all the meandering over her unstable personality and what deeper causes motivated her choices are totally irrelevant on the basis of the fact that she was a teacher and supposedly committed to the basic rule of respecting others.
26 Reviews
Disturbing
Anonynonynony4 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I just found out about this movie from a true crime forum, and as someone who has long followed this saga in the news, I wanted to check it out. This movie details the deeply disturbing relationship between 30something teacher Mary Kay Letourneau, and her preteen student, Vili Fulauu. For those who haven't followed the story, once Mary was released from prison and Vili was of age, they married. The last several years of their relationship appeared to be quite tumultuous, with separations and reconciliations creeping slowly towards divorce. However, Mary developed terminal cancer, and Vili returned to care for her until her death this past July.
Anyway, the movie takes a relatively sympathetic view towards Mary, but seems to try to explain her more than excuse her. One cannot watch more than a minute of this portrayal and think this is a healthy woman making sound decisions. Mary comes across as extremely childish, a mental teenager herself; sexually naive, extremely passive and submissive while also desperate for attention and approval. As the movie progresses, she builds a series of flimsy rationales for her decisions, and seems nearly delusional at times. The movie takes us through a number of moments where you want to yell at her to stop, to refuse, to go home, to send him home. But Mary becomes too flattered, too enthralled, too emotionally dependent on Vili to ever actually do it. These scenes reflect real-life moments as described by Mary and Vili, and recorded in case reports.
Vili is more straightforward, a precocious kid who talks a big game with his friends about how he's gonna tap the teacher, who eventually gets in way over his head. Vili was, is, hardly the first teenage boy to be hot for teacher, to be full of bluster, to flirt and charm and push the boundaries. But where Mary should have said no, she said yes. Where she should have discouraged, she encouraged. Vili got in deeper and deeper until he saw himself as in love with Mary. The narrative of him being the "aggressor" in their relationship is meant to fall flat, as if Mary had an iota better judgment than she did, she would have, and should have, kiboshed the whole thing long before it got that far. Vili wasn't an "aggressor", he was a boy playing a game, subtly egged on to take it further and further. For all Mary perceives him as an adult who just hasn't turned 18 yet, there are several moments where we see Vili emotional, vulnerable, impulsive, reminding the viewer that seriously, he's a kid.
So it went, both Mary and Vili perceived themselves as star-crossed lovers, ignoring the inconvenient fact that he was only 13 when the affair started. Mary's catastrophic failures in judgment are compounded by her failure to use any kind of birth control, resulting in two children before poor Vili had turned 15. The second born in prison.
One beef I have with this movie is the portrayal of Steve, Mary's husband. While their unhappy marriage has never been a secret, Steve is portrayed as an abusive brute in this film, seemingly as a way to highlight Mary's vulnerability and loneliness - and, perhaps, justify why she lapped up Vili's flirtations. I may be wrong, but in studying this case, I have never come across anything to suggest Steve was physically abusive to Mary.
I am a few years younger than Vili is today, and near the age Mary was when she began raping Vili. I cannot imagine ever doing the things she did or making the decisions she made. I cannot conceive of the desperation for male attention and approval that would lead to accepting those things from a child. I cannot conceive of being in my 30s and giggling over a teenage boy's eyes or calling him my soulmate. I cannot imagine throwing away my marriage, family, career, and dignity over a young boy's flattering words. Whether malicious or not, Mary was a deeply disturbed individual who swept herself and Vili into a toxic folie à deux that defined both their lives. While this movie is hardly a hard-hitting documentary, it actually does hit several points accurately, and succeeds in leaving you sick to your stomach while, at least on the surface, calling it a "love story."
Anyway, the movie takes a relatively sympathetic view towards Mary, but seems to try to explain her more than excuse her. One cannot watch more than a minute of this portrayal and think this is a healthy woman making sound decisions. Mary comes across as extremely childish, a mental teenager herself; sexually naive, extremely passive and submissive while also desperate for attention and approval. As the movie progresses, she builds a series of flimsy rationales for her decisions, and seems nearly delusional at times. The movie takes us through a number of moments where you want to yell at her to stop, to refuse, to go home, to send him home. But Mary becomes too flattered, too enthralled, too emotionally dependent on Vili to ever actually do it. These scenes reflect real-life moments as described by Mary and Vili, and recorded in case reports.
Vili is more straightforward, a precocious kid who talks a big game with his friends about how he's gonna tap the teacher, who eventually gets in way over his head. Vili was, is, hardly the first teenage boy to be hot for teacher, to be full of bluster, to flirt and charm and push the boundaries. But where Mary should have said no, she said yes. Where she should have discouraged, she encouraged. Vili got in deeper and deeper until he saw himself as in love with Mary. The narrative of him being the "aggressor" in their relationship is meant to fall flat, as if Mary had an iota better judgment than she did, she would have, and should have, kiboshed the whole thing long before it got that far. Vili wasn't an "aggressor", he was a boy playing a game, subtly egged on to take it further and further. For all Mary perceives him as an adult who just hasn't turned 18 yet, there are several moments where we see Vili emotional, vulnerable, impulsive, reminding the viewer that seriously, he's a kid.
So it went, both Mary and Vili perceived themselves as star-crossed lovers, ignoring the inconvenient fact that he was only 13 when the affair started. Mary's catastrophic failures in judgment are compounded by her failure to use any kind of birth control, resulting in two children before poor Vili had turned 15. The second born in prison.
One beef I have with this movie is the portrayal of Steve, Mary's husband. While their unhappy marriage has never been a secret, Steve is portrayed as an abusive brute in this film, seemingly as a way to highlight Mary's vulnerability and loneliness - and, perhaps, justify why she lapped up Vili's flirtations. I may be wrong, but in studying this case, I have never come across anything to suggest Steve was physically abusive to Mary.
I am a few years younger than Vili is today, and near the age Mary was when she began raping Vili. I cannot imagine ever doing the things she did or making the decisions she made. I cannot conceive of the desperation for male attention and approval that would lead to accepting those things from a child. I cannot conceive of being in my 30s and giggling over a teenage boy's eyes or calling him my soulmate. I cannot imagine throwing away my marriage, family, career, and dignity over a young boy's flattering words. Whether malicious or not, Mary was a deeply disturbed individual who swept herself and Vili into a toxic folie à deux that defined both their lives. While this movie is hardly a hard-hitting documentary, it actually does hit several points accurately, and succeeds in leaving you sick to your stomach while, at least on the surface, calling it a "love story."
Starved For Love.
rmax30482321 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not sure this review is worth reading. I've only watched the first ten minutes or so of the film but its trajectory is already so clearly outlined that I'm not going to bother with the rest of it. Well, maybe I will but I don't expect any surprises.
Here's a rough approximation of the opening scene.
Mary Kay Letourneau hangs up the phone and enters the bathroom where her husband is shaving before the mirror. "My father has prostate cancer," she says. The husband pauses for a second then continues shaving. "They only give him three months to live," she says. The husband continues shaving and replies, "What do you want me to do about it?" I'm still laughing.
Okay. Here's the story, including allusions to what I remember of the case itself. She's a teacher, starved for love. Her husband seems not to care for her, she's had a miscarriage, he life is falling apart.
BUT -- she's a teacher and one of her students, a thirteen-year-old boy, shows an interest in her. In real life, Vili Fuala'au was a burly Samoan kid with a buzz cut. In the movie he's played by a sensitive-looking Latino with large and gentle eyes. And he's a genius too. You ought to see his copies of Georgia O'Keefe's painting. Magnificent.
He makes some curious remark about the way she dresses and she takes him aside to reprimand him. The next thing you know, they're in love and she becomes pregnant somewhere along the line. In prison -- this is all in the first few minutes of the movie -- the other members of her therapy group call her a child molester and other names. Her attorney claims that she's bipolar and should be on medication. Mary Kay knows better. She shakes her head, tears in her eyes -- no, she's not bipolar and not a child molester. She's in love and so is Vili. In life, her lover sold the rights to his story to a tabloid newspaper for a sum I don't remember.
I do recall from the case that she was released from jail on probation or something, with the proviso that she never see Vili again, but amor vincit omnia, including the provisions of probation, and the two lovers are caught one night humping in a car parked under a street light, the windows all fogged up by an excess of cathexis.
My suggestion is to simply watch the opening, then sit back and connect all the dots mentally, which saves the time, expense, and difficulty of watching this movie. The case itself, historically, should have been handled differently. Mary Kay Letourneau should have been told to find an older lover and Vili should have been spanked for cheating both inside and outside of class. I know Samoans and I know thirteen-year-old boys and -- trust me on this, if nothing else -- he wasn't corrupted by doing something that every thirteen-year-old boy on the planet would love to do with a young, attractive, lonely teacher like Mary Kay Letourneau.
It's a curious thing. I spent two years as an anthropologist studying Samoan personality in a small village on Tutuila and the sexual fantasies of boys, and of grown men for that matter, didn't involve younger girls, as they so often seem to do in Western society, but older women instead. From his cultural point of view, Vili got a lucky break. But sometimes I wonder if we ought not to just stay out of other people's fantasies, as long as there are no victims, and let conflicts be resolved between the individuals. There might be much less pain than if we turned something like this into a cause celebre.
The movie, quite naturally, casts Mary Kay Letourneau in the role of suffering victim. Most of the movies in this genre show us a misunderstood and threatened woman. In this case, I kind of agree with that view. The cure may have been considerably worse than the disease.
Here's a rough approximation of the opening scene.
Mary Kay Letourneau hangs up the phone and enters the bathroom where her husband is shaving before the mirror. "My father has prostate cancer," she says. The husband pauses for a second then continues shaving. "They only give him three months to live," she says. The husband continues shaving and replies, "What do you want me to do about it?" I'm still laughing.
Okay. Here's the story, including allusions to what I remember of the case itself. She's a teacher, starved for love. Her husband seems not to care for her, she's had a miscarriage, he life is falling apart.
BUT -- she's a teacher and one of her students, a thirteen-year-old boy, shows an interest in her. In real life, Vili Fuala'au was a burly Samoan kid with a buzz cut. In the movie he's played by a sensitive-looking Latino with large and gentle eyes. And he's a genius too. You ought to see his copies of Georgia O'Keefe's painting. Magnificent.
He makes some curious remark about the way she dresses and she takes him aside to reprimand him. The next thing you know, they're in love and she becomes pregnant somewhere along the line. In prison -- this is all in the first few minutes of the movie -- the other members of her therapy group call her a child molester and other names. Her attorney claims that she's bipolar and should be on medication. Mary Kay knows better. She shakes her head, tears in her eyes -- no, she's not bipolar and not a child molester. She's in love and so is Vili. In life, her lover sold the rights to his story to a tabloid newspaper for a sum I don't remember.
I do recall from the case that she was released from jail on probation or something, with the proviso that she never see Vili again, but amor vincit omnia, including the provisions of probation, and the two lovers are caught one night humping in a car parked under a street light, the windows all fogged up by an excess of cathexis.
My suggestion is to simply watch the opening, then sit back and connect all the dots mentally, which saves the time, expense, and difficulty of watching this movie. The case itself, historically, should have been handled differently. Mary Kay Letourneau should have been told to find an older lover and Vili should have been spanked for cheating both inside and outside of class. I know Samoans and I know thirteen-year-old boys and -- trust me on this, if nothing else -- he wasn't corrupted by doing something that every thirteen-year-old boy on the planet would love to do with a young, attractive, lonely teacher like Mary Kay Letourneau.
It's a curious thing. I spent two years as an anthropologist studying Samoan personality in a small village on Tutuila and the sexual fantasies of boys, and of grown men for that matter, didn't involve younger girls, as they so often seem to do in Western society, but older women instead. From his cultural point of view, Vili got a lucky break. But sometimes I wonder if we ought not to just stay out of other people's fantasies, as long as there are no victims, and let conflicts be resolved between the individuals. There might be much less pain than if we turned something like this into a cause celebre.
The movie, quite naturally, casts Mary Kay Letourneau in the role of suffering victim. Most of the movies in this genre show us a misunderstood and threatened woman. In this case, I kind of agree with that view. The cure may have been considerably worse than the disease.
I didn't see this movie as a justification
eskaty23 October 2005
I guess we're all capable of interpreting a movie in whatever light we are predisposed to. Keeping that in mind, I must disagree with those who believed that this film approved of Mary Kay Letourneau. I thought the movie, although told from Mary Kay's point of view, was careful to show how distorted her point of view really was.
For the most part, based on news stories I have seen, the film stayed pretty close to the facts as presented by the investigators and the parties involved. But the film did have a spin--Letourneau was portrayed as an irresponsible, almost infantilized woman, who looked to men to define and complete her. From the first, her relationship with her husband was shown to be indifferent, even hostile--so he could not provide her with the validation she needed. Rapid flashbacks were used to show how her relationship with her father was unrealistic (bordering on hero worship). To my knowledge, the film did not show several defining events in her life with father that might have shed even more light on her pathology. But, although the movie implied that these dysfunctional relationships contributed to her behavior, I do not think it tried to pretend that she was mentally healthy or morally right. In fact, I think Penelope Ann Miller struck just the right note--a mixture of manipulative dependency and eerie, willful, innocence.
I think the important point of this movie was that although what this woman did was reprehensible, that does not mean we cannot be sympathetic to her. But I certainly do not think this story was meant to be some simplistic tale of star-crossed lovers. The filmmakers juxtaposed various techniques--such as bright and dark lighting, realistic and silk-screened sequences, and jarring jump-cuts--in order to cast doubt on the perceptions and motives of all of the people involved, including Vili. It is not clear to what extent Mary Kay used her helplessness almost aggressively to ensnare Vili, nor to what extent Vili was taken in by her--or if he even manipulated her in his own right. It is a very complex situation. True, Vili was a child, but I was not 13 so long ago that I have forgotten that children that age can consider themselves quite grown up and fancy themselves in love with adults. It is the adult's responsibility not to capitalize on adolescent emotions--but if the adult is an arrested adolescent him- or herself, we have a big problem. I think that, more-so than pedophilia, was Letourneau's pathology. (Of course, if you want to get technical, adults attracted to adolescents are not pedophiles, but ephebophiles. The definition of ephebophilia actually fits Mary Kay much better.)
The question that kept popping into my mind was: how would I view this situation differently if the gender roles were reversed? I had a hard time imagining that eventuality, however, because the power dynamic between men and girls is usually so different. I could not envision a grown man appealing to a young girl by being so emotionally helpless. I am not expert, however. Personally, I was disgusted by Letourneau's behavior, and am highly doubtful that her relationship with Vili will work out. But I think the film did a good job of presenting the situation in such a way that the viewer could draw his or her own conclusions.
For the most part, based on news stories I have seen, the film stayed pretty close to the facts as presented by the investigators and the parties involved. But the film did have a spin--Letourneau was portrayed as an irresponsible, almost infantilized woman, who looked to men to define and complete her. From the first, her relationship with her husband was shown to be indifferent, even hostile--so he could not provide her with the validation she needed. Rapid flashbacks were used to show how her relationship with her father was unrealistic (bordering on hero worship). To my knowledge, the film did not show several defining events in her life with father that might have shed even more light on her pathology. But, although the movie implied that these dysfunctional relationships contributed to her behavior, I do not think it tried to pretend that she was mentally healthy or morally right. In fact, I think Penelope Ann Miller struck just the right note--a mixture of manipulative dependency and eerie, willful, innocence.
I think the important point of this movie was that although what this woman did was reprehensible, that does not mean we cannot be sympathetic to her. But I certainly do not think this story was meant to be some simplistic tale of star-crossed lovers. The filmmakers juxtaposed various techniques--such as bright and dark lighting, realistic and silk-screened sequences, and jarring jump-cuts--in order to cast doubt on the perceptions and motives of all of the people involved, including Vili. It is not clear to what extent Mary Kay used her helplessness almost aggressively to ensnare Vili, nor to what extent Vili was taken in by her--or if he even manipulated her in his own right. It is a very complex situation. True, Vili was a child, but I was not 13 so long ago that I have forgotten that children that age can consider themselves quite grown up and fancy themselves in love with adults. It is the adult's responsibility not to capitalize on adolescent emotions--but if the adult is an arrested adolescent him- or herself, we have a big problem. I think that, more-so than pedophilia, was Letourneau's pathology. (Of course, if you want to get technical, adults attracted to adolescents are not pedophiles, but ephebophiles. The definition of ephebophilia actually fits Mary Kay much better.)
The question that kept popping into my mind was: how would I view this situation differently if the gender roles were reversed? I had a hard time imagining that eventuality, however, because the power dynamic between men and girls is usually so different. I could not envision a grown man appealing to a young girl by being so emotionally helpless. I am not expert, however. Personally, I was disgusted by Letourneau's behavior, and am highly doubtful that her relationship with Vili will work out. But I think the film did a good job of presenting the situation in such a way that the viewer could draw his or her own conclusions.
yeap its wrong.....but...she is TRULY in love..(2020 Update include)
afterdarkpak16 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
What if.. that lawyer ask her .... If a 32 year old guy or woman Is "in love" with your 13 years old daughter or son... and got pregnant.. what you think? .. she will be ok with it ?..
anyhow.. she released in 2004 or 2005 and married to Villi..and she died in 2020 with her lover by side.
As i understand, she never had rough childhood or that much .. but...first.. she got pregnant with man that she never love . thats stupid of her.. but she married that guy because her parents forced her. According to wiki pedia n other news site, both husband n wife having an affairs. but in this movie, she never had any with MAN.,untill one kid ( its weird that a big kid with little kids in class?) is start noticing her and he touched her heart. she fall in love with him. and all very hard.
It was a luck , that a kid touched her heart, if there was a grown man knows her feeling that she definitely never go for that kid.
later.. she got arrested ..then released but arrested again in car. and she went for jail a long time.
Her whole life... her mind..was never grown.. it was still in teen state... to be happy n in love....
anyhow.. she released in 2004 or 2005 and married to Villi..and she died in 2020 with her lover by side.
As i understand, she never had rough childhood or that much .. but...first.. she got pregnant with man that she never love . thats stupid of her.. but she married that guy because her parents forced her. According to wiki pedia n other news site, both husband n wife having an affairs. but in this movie, she never had any with MAN.,untill one kid ( its weird that a big kid with little kids in class?) is start noticing her and he touched her heart. she fall in love with him. and all very hard.
It was a luck , that a kid touched her heart, if there was a grown man knows her feeling that she definitely never go for that kid.
later.. she got arrested ..then released but arrested again in car. and she went for jail a long time.
Her whole life... her mind..was never grown.. it was still in teen state... to be happy n in love....
dumb and dumber
blanche-226 May 2005
This movie is a pathetic attempt, apparently, to justify the actions of Mary Ann Letourneau. In order to do this, they cast a 19-year-old -well, probably not "in order to do this." There was no way they could have cast a 12 or 13 year old as the boy because the love scenes would have grossed everyone out (if they had even been allowed to do them) - as they should. Mary Ann's boyfriend was my nephew's age, making her a pedophile. Sixth grade, people. The definition of pedophile doesn't have to include many children - all you need is one.
I really don't care about her upbringing or her unhappy marriage. She had a responsibility to her students that she did not live up to. The reason given is that she is bipolar, rejected the diagnosis, and refused to take her medication. It's understandable, then, that she was not thinking rationally. One hopes that she now understands her actions.
Now that she and Vili are married and have two children together, I pray that she is on her medication and thinking clearly.
All that aside, Penelope Ann Miller was totally convincing and perfect casting for the role.
I really don't care about her upbringing or her unhappy marriage. She had a responsibility to her students that she did not live up to. The reason given is that she is bipolar, rejected the diagnosis, and refused to take her medication. It's understandable, then, that she was not thinking rationally. One hopes that she now understands her actions.
Now that she and Vili are married and have two children together, I pray that she is on her medication and thinking clearly.
All that aside, Penelope Ann Miller was totally convincing and perfect casting for the role.
Poor Mary Kay
swrdsrb31 January 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Only in America would people still be fans of actual rapists like R Kelly,Michael Jackson,and Bill Clinton. But Mary Kay Letourneau,run for cover folks,it's the boogeywoman!.She was a poor lonely,soul who was in a bad place in her sad life at the time and this gangbanger,not an innocent kid,pursued and lander her. Yet the press manipulated the public to make her appear to be the villain. I grow weary of all the self righteous types who viciously insult her even after she's long since passed away. The movie seemed to have taken cues from both James Robinson and Greg Olsen's books. It humanized her and played more fair with her than the press did or ever could. I still remember the closing scene as she starts her sentence. Vili leaves his daughters with his mother while he goes upstairs to make out with a girl his own age. That's appalling behavior for a father. Frankly I believe Mary was too good for Steve,the abuser,and Vili,the user. He got away with seducing her and dumping her when he didn't want to be with an almost 60 year old woman. Penelope Ann Miller played the role pretty good. May Mary Kay Letournau be at peace now.
Made for T.V. (Tabloid vicariousness) failure.
Kansas-526 February 2000
An actor asks, "What's my motivation?," to understand his or her character. After viewing this this "docudrama," this vague and haphazard farce, a viewer wonders what anyone's motivation was.
This inept offspring of daytime T.V. (the Oprah show) missed by a mile a great opportunity to explore weighty issues.
Its characters were all shallow and superficial, its story line far less socially redeeming than a "Simpsons" episode. It gratuitously portrayed investigating police as unprofessional and incompetent. It failed to offer why the court might treat the main character, a female child molester, so differently than it would have a male perp.
Why did this unrepentant woman begin "grooming" her second grade student, beginning an affair with him when he returned to her sixth grade class? Why did the boy's mother testify in her behalf? The simple answer is overwhelming narcissism, plus generational rationalization and greed. The movie gave no hint of that.
Why wasn't the viewer informed that the victim's mother sold interview rights to print and television tabloids, parading her adolescent son on "The Today Show"? That Mary Kay's lawyer cashed in, she herself appealing a "Son of Sam" statute so she could benefit from her crime by selling her story to the highest bidder?
Why wasn't it explained that LeTourneau's father was a former right wing Republican congressman, the 1972 American Independent Presidential candidate, the John Birch Society President? In 1983 John Schmitz's political career ended when he was found to have had children by his own community college student, exposed only when that mistress sexually mutilated their infant son? Yet Letourneau's dad had removed his many kids from "too liberal" Catholic schools, fighting to keep all schoolchildren from receiving any sex education?
A month after her conditional release, again pregnant with the now 14-year-old's second daughter, Mary Kay received 7 1/2 years in prison for numerous probation violations. A prophetic editorial regarding the sad affair then appeared in the Seattle Times: "At the end of two wretched hours, LeTourneau was led off to jail, and this salacious melange of made-for-TV seaminess was over, until casting begins."
Sure enough, 18 months later, filming of this travesty was underway.
This inept offspring of daytime T.V. (the Oprah show) missed by a mile a great opportunity to explore weighty issues.
Its characters were all shallow and superficial, its story line far less socially redeeming than a "Simpsons" episode. It gratuitously portrayed investigating police as unprofessional and incompetent. It failed to offer why the court might treat the main character, a female child molester, so differently than it would have a male perp.
Why did this unrepentant woman begin "grooming" her second grade student, beginning an affair with him when he returned to her sixth grade class? Why did the boy's mother testify in her behalf? The simple answer is overwhelming narcissism, plus generational rationalization and greed. The movie gave no hint of that.
Why wasn't the viewer informed that the victim's mother sold interview rights to print and television tabloids, parading her adolescent son on "The Today Show"? That Mary Kay's lawyer cashed in, she herself appealing a "Son of Sam" statute so she could benefit from her crime by selling her story to the highest bidder?
Why wasn't it explained that LeTourneau's father was a former right wing Republican congressman, the 1972 American Independent Presidential candidate, the John Birch Society President? In 1983 John Schmitz's political career ended when he was found to have had children by his own community college student, exposed only when that mistress sexually mutilated their infant son? Yet Letourneau's dad had removed his many kids from "too liberal" Catholic schools, fighting to keep all schoolchildren from receiving any sex education?
A month after her conditional release, again pregnant with the now 14-year-old's second daughter, Mary Kay received 7 1/2 years in prison for numerous probation violations. A prophetic editorial regarding the sad affair then appeared in the Seattle Times: "At the end of two wretched hours, LeTourneau was led off to jail, and this salacious melange of made-for-TV seaminess was over, until casting begins."
Sure enough, 18 months later, filming of this travesty was underway.
So the Marriage has NOW actually lasted 10 years in real life after her release from prison.
Andrew_S_Hatton13 April 2015
I was drawn to this by a news report of interviews between the actual couple involved.
The story seemed amazing - but true and fairly well represented in this drama.
I think it proves the old adage 'hard cases make bad laws'.
I also think that prison is rarely the best response to law breaking - although in this case it was probably necessary because of the the subsequent offending - though 7 weeks rather than 7 years might have been sufficient - as one who has worked with imprisoned people I know that usually longer detention achieves very little apart from keeping the convict out of circulation. About the only two justifications for continued imprisonment are that a person presents an immediate danger to others or their criminality is so prolific and out of control that incarceration is required.
However, she was diagnosed as mentally ill, which suggests to me the detention should have been in a hospital not a prison.
Another reviewer with some knowledge of Samoan customs has commented that Samoans have a different attitude to sexual relationships between younger males and older women to most Western cultures.. However, we are not told to what extent Vili was influenced by his Samoan ancestry and I am not sure whether the influence is consequential on conditioning and socialisation rather than psychological - so these remarks maybe irrelevant. It is many years since I studied - at a fairly basic level - sociology and anthropology but do recall Margaret Mead's works "Coming of Age in Samoa" (1928)and "Growing Up In New Guinea" (1930) were influential on both disciplines, but I cannot now recall the details.
The saddest aspect of all this is that the families involved have lived in the glare of publicity for many years now, which in itself can be a disabling factor.
Nonetheless, it is well worth viewing, especially if viewers can put their prejudices aside, whilst watching and view the Movie as a way of gaining greater insight into the complexity of human behaviours and relationships.
The story seemed amazing - but true and fairly well represented in this drama.
I think it proves the old adage 'hard cases make bad laws'.
I also think that prison is rarely the best response to law breaking - although in this case it was probably necessary because of the the subsequent offending - though 7 weeks rather than 7 years might have been sufficient - as one who has worked with imprisoned people I know that usually longer detention achieves very little apart from keeping the convict out of circulation. About the only two justifications for continued imprisonment are that a person presents an immediate danger to others or their criminality is so prolific and out of control that incarceration is required.
However, she was diagnosed as mentally ill, which suggests to me the detention should have been in a hospital not a prison.
Another reviewer with some knowledge of Samoan customs has commented that Samoans have a different attitude to sexual relationships between younger males and older women to most Western cultures.. However, we are not told to what extent Vili was influenced by his Samoan ancestry and I am not sure whether the influence is consequential on conditioning and socialisation rather than psychological - so these remarks maybe irrelevant. It is many years since I studied - at a fairly basic level - sociology and anthropology but do recall Margaret Mead's works "Coming of Age in Samoa" (1928)and "Growing Up In New Guinea" (1930) were influential on both disciplines, but I cannot now recall the details.
The saddest aspect of all this is that the families involved have lived in the glare of publicity for many years now, which in itself can be a disabling factor.
Nonetheless, it is well worth viewing, especially if viewers can put their prejudices aside, whilst watching and view the Movie as a way of gaining greater insight into the complexity of human behaviours and relationships.
Mythologized account of a child rapist
daimonmagus22 October 2005
This is just one more of those hideous films that you find on Lifetime TV which portray the abhorrent behavior of some disgusting woman in an empathetic manner. Along with other such nasty films as "The Burning Bed," "Enough," or "Monster," this film takes a disgusting criminal and attempts to show the viewer why she's not such a bad person after all. Give us a break! Here's my question to the filmmakers: If LeTourneau were a man, and Vili were a 12 year old girl, would you have made a picture sympathizing and empathizing with this person? Answer: Hell no.
Imagine switching the genders in this film, and then you'll see just why myself and others here consider this a worthless piece of garbage. Were the genders switched, there would be no attempt to empathize with the criminal. Instead, we'd likely be treated to a portrayal of a monstrous and hideous man preying upon a young girl, his lascivious behavior landing him in prison, and his brainwashed victim suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. The only reason LeTourneau does not receive the same treatment in this film is by virtue of her sex.
Let's call a spade a spade. LeTourneau is a pedophile. Plain and simple. No ifs, ands or buts. She's a criminal who belongs in prison, and deserves our derision and contempt, but certainly not our pity or empathy.
Imagine switching the genders in this film, and then you'll see just why myself and others here consider this a worthless piece of garbage. Were the genders switched, there would be no attempt to empathize with the criminal. Instead, we'd likely be treated to a portrayal of a monstrous and hideous man preying upon a young girl, his lascivious behavior landing him in prison, and his brainwashed victim suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. The only reason LeTourneau does not receive the same treatment in this film is by virtue of her sex.
Let's call a spade a spade. LeTourneau is a pedophile. Plain and simple. No ifs, ands or buts. She's a criminal who belongs in prison, and deserves our derision and contempt, but certainly not our pity or empathy.
a very interesting film
mid31619 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I very much enjoyed this well acted emotionally complex film about a very controversial subject, intergenerational relationships as a former "victim" of such a relationship i have some very strong view's on it my motto has always been "love is never wrong" but anyway back to the film.
i very much appreciated the greyness of the characters, particularly with the boy Vili the way he could either be interpreted as a smart sensitive young man who genuinely loved her, or as a manipulative little b@£%%£!^& who just wanted sex (he nearly rapes HER! in one scene,) i personally am not sure which is the truth, it is probably somewhere in the middle.
Also am i the only one who noticed the parallels between this story and Lolita with the gender roles reversed, a strong mutual affinity and attraction which slowly spirals into something mutually destructive.
i very much appreciated the greyness of the characters, particularly with the boy Vili the way he could either be interpreted as a smart sensitive young man who genuinely loved her, or as a manipulative little b@£%%£!^& who just wanted sex (he nearly rapes HER! in one scene,) i personally am not sure which is the truth, it is probably somewhere in the middle.
Also am i the only one who noticed the parallels between this story and Lolita with the gender roles reversed, a strong mutual affinity and attraction which slowly spirals into something mutually destructive.
Uneasy balance of moral perspectives
stugood-0700620 June 2022
The film romanticises and sympathises with the main character; her struggles; and ultimately her solace in a 12 / 13 year-old boy. This retelling is supposedly quite accurate to the real-life incident.
The actress committed to the difficult role and plays her as emotionally vulnerable, and even likable, but perhaps with a hint of confused-delusional thinking. When the teacher is falling for the boy the film's score swiftly tells us it's wrong. Thus, in some sense, you could say the film is balanced in attempting to portray this woman's sense of mind, as well as society's split feelings. In any case, it mostly makes for uncomfortable viewing with a TV-movie sheen negating some of its sting.
The actress committed to the difficult role and plays her as emotionally vulnerable, and even likable, but perhaps with a hint of confused-delusional thinking. When the teacher is falling for the boy the film's score swiftly tells us it's wrong. Thus, in some sense, you could say the film is balanced in attempting to portray this woman's sense of mind, as well as society's split feelings. In any case, it mostly makes for uncomfortable viewing with a TV-movie sheen negating some of its sting.
Say it isn't so Mary Kay!
skillz28 September 2000
To make a long story short, this shows how "Morally Challenged" America has become; especially subtitling it "All-American Girl". They turned a case of pedophilia and statutory rape into "Romeo and Juliet." The USA network was fastest to jump on this media hyped story and redramatized it!
They distorted a couple of things to make it palatable, first they hired a 19 year-old actor to play Mary Kay's 12-year old lover. Secondly it tells the women of America that it is okay to commit pedophilia if your husband is an insensitive jerk! But the movie, and the media failed to ask the tough questions! Like; what if it were a man, that had a baby with one of his sixth grade students? Will he be portrayed as a victim, or will he be instantly prosecuted and put under the jail?
If the teacher were male then the viewers would see this story for what it is; sensationalizing a story about a teacher that put their emotional needs and desires ahead of the well being of a child!
They distorted a couple of things to make it palatable, first they hired a 19 year-old actor to play Mary Kay's 12-year old lover. Secondly it tells the women of America that it is okay to commit pedophilia if your husband is an insensitive jerk! But the movie, and the media failed to ask the tough questions! Like; what if it were a man, that had a baby with one of his sixth grade students? Will he be portrayed as a victim, or will he be instantly prosecuted and put under the jail?
If the teacher were male then the viewers would see this story for what it is; sensationalizing a story about a teacher that put their emotional needs and desires ahead of the well being of a child!
i also support Mary Kay.
olantern33 April 2008
i do not see anything wrong with a love relationship between the boy and Mary Kay. she needed love and attention and the boy truly loved her and still does. not many men would take the responsibility of 2 children even in their late teens but he did at an early age. he must love her very much! so enough of the bashing Mary Kay routine. did anyone know that a 12 year old in some foreign countries are considered old enough to have sex with anyone? so what is morally right or wrong here does not mean it is right or wrong everywhere. it is up to the individuals involved. she is not a monster, she just needed love and comfort and someone who really cared. i recommend this movie to everyone, but watch it with a fair open mind.
Worthy Effort
brian_r_wright23 January 2006
The mother of the boy during the trial expressed it best: "There is no rape where there is no coercion," or words to that effect. I totally disagree with the other reviewer's feelings that what Mary Kay and Billy had together was wrong. In fact, they were (and are) in love; the movie conveys the heartbreak caused by Puritanical statists interfering in peaceful, voluntary, and in this case loving sexual relationships.
The acting is first-rate, especially by Mercedes Ruehl and Penelope Ann Miller. The subhumanity of police/prosecutorial behavior is accurately presented.
The movie, by honestly portraying the anguish and the ecstasy of a true love occurring between an adult woman and a minor man, confronts the Talibanistic-Christian sexual repression that underlies far too much of American society. I have nothing but sympathy and even admiration for Mary Kay and her young man, holding forth for love against such brutal hostility; I would like to have seen the movie updated to current reality.
The acting is first-rate, especially by Mercedes Ruehl and Penelope Ann Miller. The subhumanity of police/prosecutorial behavior is accurately presented.
The movie, by honestly portraying the anguish and the ecstasy of a true love occurring between an adult woman and a minor man, confronts the Talibanistic-Christian sexual repression that underlies far too much of American society. I have nothing but sympathy and even admiration for Mary Kay and her young man, holding forth for love against such brutal hostility; I would like to have seen the movie updated to current reality.
If it were a man...
fasc10 August 2003
this film would be a dark and foreboding exposé on the horrors of child-rape. But a woman having sex with a boy is some mild story about forbidden romance, handled with kid gloves and a brief nod to 'oh, the mistakes the heart makes'.
I don't think Mary Kay Letourneau is a rapist.
Markesia55 April 2005
This is the third time I have watched this movie and I love it.
I think that with all that was going on in her life before the affair with Vili caused become emotionally and mentally drained.
First, her brother drowns in the family's background swimming pool.
Second, She finds out her father had been having a nine year affair with a student.
Third, She had to marry a man that she was not in love with because she was having his child and would be disowned from family if she didn't marry him.
Fourth, she finds out that her father has cancer.
Fifth, she miscarries her fifth child.
Sixth, she was having marital problems and was separated from her husband.
She was feeling vulnerable and unhappy with her life at that time so she needed to be held, comforted loved and needed a shoulder to cry on and Vili just happened to be there when she needed someone. He gave her all those things she needed and obviously even more. She wanted to be happy in her life and Vili did just that-- made her happy! So that's why I say that it wasn't rape it was LOVE!
I think that with all that was going on in her life before the affair with Vili caused become emotionally and mentally drained.
First, her brother drowns in the family's background swimming pool.
Second, She finds out her father had been having a nine year affair with a student.
Third, She had to marry a man that she was not in love with because she was having his child and would be disowned from family if she didn't marry him.
Fourth, she finds out that her father has cancer.
Fifth, she miscarries her fifth child.
Sixth, she was having marital problems and was separated from her husband.
She was feeling vulnerable and unhappy with her life at that time so she needed to be held, comforted loved and needed a shoulder to cry on and Vili just happened to be there when she needed someone. He gave her all those things she needed and obviously even more. She wanted to be happy in her life and Vili did just that-- made her happy! So that's why I say that it wasn't rape it was LOVE!
a good movie!!
laurenluvssimon13 October 2008
i loved this movie, its not many times that i watch a movie and the second its over i want to watch it again, but this movie did it for me...this movie portrays the life of Mary Kay Letouneau famous for having sex with a 13 year old student in her 6th grade class,Vili, and having 2 of his children. this movie is almost completely accurate, and the actors did a great job..the movie starts out with Mary Kay in prison and goes back to periods of her life, it portrays her childhood,her crappy marriage, and her relationship with Vili....it wraps everything into a good movie...my opinion on the Mary Kay Letouneau's actual case is that she definitely must be a little ill in the mind to have sex with a 13 year old and risk everything..in the movie it does say that Mary had bipolar disorder which distorted her thinking,but i don't know if i really believe that....the movie is great, i would definitely recommend it!!
very fair depiction of true story
damirradic1412 September 2006
I was very pleasantly surprised with this TV-movie about famous, for someone notorious, relationship between thirty-something Mary Kay Letourneau and her 13-years old student Vili. Narrow minds will never realize and accept various possibilities of human psyche and relationships, narrow minds have theirs "moral values" and laws which are so arrogant and stupid that is hard to believe. There wasn't any "rape", there was two people fell in love and made love through sexual intercourse. It's so natural and good, and only puritan and/or bigotry people can be against it. Unfortunately, most of people in United States and Europe today think that way. It's really sad. But movies like this, which try to have serious approach to delicate theme, are precious.
My comments are honest and totally understandable
Danielle w7 June 2001
This film was very moving and i cried alot.mary and the student were in love and i don't find anything wrong with that as long as they were happy and as for her supposedly raping him thats nonsense they both wanted it.I thought the film was very good and the cast were excellent and i recommend you to watch it i give it 10 out of 10
Great Film
stone102013 August 2004
I first saw this film when it came out in 2000 on ABC(I believe). I loved it. I didn't remember to write down the name, so I couldn't check to buy it on DVD, or to tape it next time it came on. I was ecstatic when I opened the TV guide and while reading the TV highlights for prime time and saw this film was going to be played again. I watched it the night it premiered on Lifetime and the next day when it played again. This film truly is a story of real love and soul mates finding each other. And now that the real Mary is released from jail, her and Vili say they still want to be together. That's love. If they could get past 6 years being separated, then they can make it through anything.
This is wrong!
lilrealhoney11 August 2005
I cannot believe some of the comments that I have heard on this sick story.This lady seems to have some type of mental problems to sleep with a 6th grade student.anybody in there right mind would no this type of behavior is not accepted.also to the ones who seems to think there is nothing wrong with this woman for sleeping with this child must have some serious mental problems as well.It goes to show what you are really about and what your intentions are as well.she stole this child innocence and that is wrong.also he was probably looking for love and she could have been a real woman and told him there is no way that we can have any type of romantic relationship I'm married with kids and you are my student and you are underage.but no she took advantage and slept with this child.Wrong WRONG!!!
Mary Kay
teen_tiesha9 April 2006
I Love this story on Mary Kay. This whole thing was unbelievable. Who what have thought that such a trouble maker like villi would have so much love in him.
people say that what Mary Kay did was wrong. i disagree.What they both did was fine with me because they did it out of love.
I hate the way people are going around saying that she Raped him.which is not true cause in the movie it shows villi pushing her to it.plus it takes two to have a baby, so this whole thing shouldn't be all on her if they wanna blame somebody. So for anybody who had a problem with the situation to bad, because now they are happily married with their two beautiful children and hopefully another on the way.
What they did was nobodies business but their owns.so Mary going to jail,her staying away from him, all the court dates and cameras was all uncalled for. If they wanna lock somebody up they should get these 70 to 80 year old men thats sleeping with people 17 through 25. HOP ON THAT CASE.
people say that what Mary Kay did was wrong. i disagree.What they both did was fine with me because they did it out of love.
I hate the way people are going around saying that she Raped him.which is not true cause in the movie it shows villi pushing her to it.plus it takes two to have a baby, so this whole thing shouldn't be all on her if they wanna blame somebody. So for anybody who had a problem with the situation to bad, because now they are happily married with their two beautiful children and hopefully another on the way.
What they did was nobodies business but their owns.so Mary going to jail,her staying away from him, all the court dates and cameras was all uncalled for. If they wanna lock somebody up they should get these 70 to 80 year old men thats sleeping with people 17 through 25. HOP ON THAT CASE.
i support her
gymansticgirl1224 January 2006
I know most people think that Mary Kay Letourneau is a certified sex offender, but i don't think that i think she was in love with Vili, heck he acted more grown-up then her husband, he was there for her when she needed him, he made her feel loved and beautiful.he was strong yet sensitive? who wouldn't want a guy like that? no matter what age? Plus have you seen Vili? i mean hello he is 1000 times better looking then her now ex-husband. And when they made the movie about her, it amazed me on how everyone was saying she came on to him when it was him who came on to her, and the guy who portrayed him was super hot. I'm sure ever girl who has seen the movie will agree with me on that one.
Despicable.
mflemming29 April 2002
I just do not understand this movie. I was up all night just watching television, and this movie came on. I was sleepy, buy I managed to watch the movie anyway. As I was watching it, I first thought: Is this true? Did this really happen? So, I watched the movie. When the movie went off, I was just flabbergasted. I could not move one bit, because I could not believe what I have just seen. So, I was talking to my aunt about it, and she told me that it really happened. I feel really bad for Mary because her marriage was crumbling, and Maybe she was just looking for some comfort. And I feel sorry for Vili because maybe he just needed someone to love. And she was the right one. This movie is unbelievable.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
