The movie in a way is rather moving, no boring moment and draws your mood to keep watching it till the end. But obviously it actually is a pro-cloning movie and encourages people to support cloning. For that part, I don't like it. I don't care how other people think but I just find cloning people is simply not right! To use cloning technique to save life and cure disease that is anther matter. But cloning a baby just because you cannot get an own baby through other way? That is terrible! A child is not a toy, we should not make one like designer's product in factory. Be mature, in our life we cannot always get the things which we want. You want a child, then go and try to adopt one, there are thousands of nobody's child waiting for parent care and family love!
8 Reviews
Parents who clone a dead child
rwaite4422 August 2007
I saw this Movie and thought it was dreadfully slow. The plot has good bones and could have been something more spectacular. Basically its about aging Parents who lost their child and decide to clone their dead child. They find a doctor and team that are willing to do this. It is basically takes place before Cloning issues and laws were developed - it likens cloning to test tube babies and IVF as an alternative method for people to have children. It also shows some arguments against it.
I think the actors did a great job with a bad script.
Its not a sci-fi or even exciting medical doc. Deserved its time slot of 12.30am. I recommend not to bother with it unless you are really bored.
R
I think the actors did a great job with a bad script.
Its not a sci-fi or even exciting medical doc. Deserved its time slot of 12.30am. I recommend not to bother with it unless you are really bored.
R
Thought provoking TV Movie
temoginvampireslayer4 April 2002
While some may say that this is just an ordinary tv movie, I must concede a point, they are correct but that is not the whole story. What you may fail to realise is the ethical questions raised by the cloning of a human being. The movie addresses quite few issues that seem as relevant today as when the movie is set. Press invasion is nicely treated and the fame hungry Bridget Fonda's character goes through somewhat of a change. She goes from a cold-hearted glory-hungry monster to ethical reporter (I will not spoil the ending). Next we see a much more sympathetic depiction of the doctors involved and the research they use and the reasons they do what they do. What is most interesting is the ethical questions that you ask yourself. Would you do the same thing if it was your only avenue for having a child? Put yourself in their shoes then try and tell me you would not.
Nice To Debate...
themillion9 October 2001
The real title shown in Lifetime TV is 'One Particular Baby' or something like that.
Bridget Fonda is just great as the journalist who has the exclusive story of the first clone baby. The Doctor who actually gets through the first clone, looks like 'Weakest Link' hostess, but never says 'Goodbye' in any part of the movie.
The movie shows all the process, from the first steps of the cloning, throughout the pregnancy and the baby born (even showing the first anniversary of such news coming out).
It actually shows the reality that could come out of something like a baby clone, from the human point of view of a mother who lost her daughter and wants another baby looking just like the one she lost.
The problem is that the movie stands the not so objective side and tries to suggest that cloning is OK, when that is something being banned not only in USA or the World. So... it gives you the opportunity to disagree and hope that nobody follows such example without showing the bad that could come out of it (like the bad sheeps that came out BEFORE the first GOOD clone one), but I guess that would be 'another movie'.
Bridget Fonda is just great as the journalist who has the exclusive story of the first clone baby. The Doctor who actually gets through the first clone, looks like 'Weakest Link' hostess, but never says 'Goodbye' in any part of the movie.
The movie shows all the process, from the first steps of the cloning, throughout the pregnancy and the baby born (even showing the first anniversary of such news coming out).
It actually shows the reality that could come out of something like a baby clone, from the human point of view of a mother who lost her daughter and wants another baby looking just like the one she lost.
The problem is that the movie stands the not so objective side and tries to suggest that cloning is OK, when that is something being banned not only in USA or the World. So... it gives you the opportunity to disagree and hope that nobody follows such example without showing the bad that could come out of it (like the bad sheeps that came out BEFORE the first GOOD clone one), but I guess that would be 'another movie'.
Broadcast as "No Ordinary Baby", it raises the awareness of human cloning, I rate it "7" of 10.
TxMike9 October 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Even though this TV movie is listed on the IMdb as "After Amy", it was broadcast as "No Ordinary Baby", which seems to be a better title.
SPOILERS - This is more a story of how the media asserts themselves into our lives, uninvited, than it is about cloning. Linda Sinclair (Bridget Fonda) is a reporter who is given copies of a doctor's medical documents regarding a cloned fetus being in one of her patient mothers. She uses her leverage to expose the case which violates university research guidelines, and ultimately, some laws. Eventually they follow the doctor (Mary Beth Hurt) to discover the parents, and their story is told also.
In quick summary, the parents had lost their 5-yr-old daughter in a tragic auto accident. Cells from the cornea were used to clone the dead daughter, and to provide a new embryo which was implanted and carefully monitored to term. Because of the media attention, mom went into labor 3 weeks early, but the baby appeared healthy. However, during the second day she developed difficulty breathing, then a quick conference announced the baby had died, and the parents requested no autopsy. The doctor blamed the reporter for causing the problem.
The parents disappeared. Finally, after a year of searching, Linda followed her final instinct to find the family in another state, in a secluded place, preparing for a birthday party. The cloned baby had lived, however did have some breathing difficulties, but the parents realized she could never grow up normally unless their identities were kept secret. Linda at first was going to expose the hoax, but decided not to as the film ended. We are left to imagine how the baby must have grown up.
The film is flawed. Some of the situations are absurd and created for drama. However, it did raise some legitimate questions about whether we should clone humans. As one character said, "God did not put us on the moon, but we used the ingenuity He gave us to get there." Perhaps the same could be said of cloning. And, the "replacement" of a dead child is certainly not in the same category as cloning to select sex or physical features. However, call me "old-fashioned" if you will, but the natural method of conception is so good, and quite fun too, I hope human cloning never becomes accepted.
SPOILERS - This is more a story of how the media asserts themselves into our lives, uninvited, than it is about cloning. Linda Sinclair (Bridget Fonda) is a reporter who is given copies of a doctor's medical documents regarding a cloned fetus being in one of her patient mothers. She uses her leverage to expose the case which violates university research guidelines, and ultimately, some laws. Eventually they follow the doctor (Mary Beth Hurt) to discover the parents, and their story is told also.
In quick summary, the parents had lost their 5-yr-old daughter in a tragic auto accident. Cells from the cornea were used to clone the dead daughter, and to provide a new embryo which was implanted and carefully monitored to term. Because of the media attention, mom went into labor 3 weeks early, but the baby appeared healthy. However, during the second day she developed difficulty breathing, then a quick conference announced the baby had died, and the parents requested no autopsy. The doctor blamed the reporter for causing the problem.
The parents disappeared. Finally, after a year of searching, Linda followed her final instinct to find the family in another state, in a secluded place, preparing for a birthday party. The cloned baby had lived, however did have some breathing difficulties, but the parents realized she could never grow up normally unless their identities were kept secret. Linda at first was going to expose the hoax, but decided not to as the film ended. We are left to imagine how the baby must have grown up.
The film is flawed. Some of the situations are absurd and created for drama. However, it did raise some legitimate questions about whether we should clone humans. As one character said, "God did not put us on the moon, but we used the ingenuity He gave us to get there." Perhaps the same could be said of cloning. And, the "replacement" of a dead child is certainly not in the same category as cloning to select sex or physical features. However, call me "old-fashioned" if you will, but the natural method of conception is so good, and quite fun too, I hope human cloning never becomes accepted.
no ordinary baby ... & no ordinary movie
spj-410 August 2007
I watched this movie as entitled "No Ordinary Baby", in Australia.
I was tempted to turn off it straight away, as this midday movie, seemed to be presenting a pathetic uninteresting drama whose subject was unappealing to me. But gradually I chose to involve myself, & soon found it was raising MANY issues relevant to our modern society that the media prefers to snowball into greater injustice!
Nor was I sympathetic to the doctor & his devoted nurse, as against the young staff member who presents herself devoutly committed to the cause, but seems to quickly fade in her significance. The nurse, compassionate to her family, yet daring to care more broadly, seems to become a criminal, in broader eyes of deception that her family & friends struggle to be more than bewildered & frustrated by!
Earlier on, this nurse is noted to be deleting computer files, suspiciously! In her turn, the journalist breaking the story, seeks to reconcile herself with her failed sense of infallibility, & sees shades of grey in her emerging dilemmas! Her confessions to her companion are a stark contrast to the bold pronouncements she continues to make in public media presentations, impressively presented!
I thought I would have liked her, this journalist researching & breaking stories! But I didn't think I would have ever liked the nurse! But she was building into her role of frustrated & toughly imprisoned victim, who might have been adjudged in contempt of court, but was growing into her stature of a media celebrity she was not accustomed to, but daring to nonetheless further the rights of her clients! And those beyond!
While the journalist has her emerging dilemmas coming from within. Like partners yet enemies, in a devolving zone of instability that seems to be much less, for their individual contributions! I think this is a great movie! I haven't even addressed the rights & perspectives of the mother & father, let alone, of the precarious situation of the emerging baby!
Each display their own WORTHINESS of contribution in turn & in time!
Each dare to be courageous in their individual & personal decisions!!!
Look at the father's justified sense of frustration! Look at the mother's tolerance of pain & yet quiet wisdom amidst the furore about her! Look into the eyes of the innocent victim! And still more emerges of mother & father & child, as if in a manger, & bewildered to be there! Imprisons in the modern era, have many boundaries! Look too at a steadfast doctor, & a compassionate nurse & her son & her husband, & a judgemental sensational broader media fury! So confronting & yet so real! As if straight out of Lindy Chamberlain & dingo folklore of contrivance, as presented in, "Through My Eyes", or too in Douglas Woods' journalistic masterpiece exposed in "Cry Freedom" in Nelson Mandela's unlikely escape into freedom! It's all here, in a drama of CRISES we should not react against, but embrace!
Only love is its ultimate conqueror!
But which one will find a salvation in this earthquake zone of uncertainty? I saw what I saw! It's your turn to judge, & see what you might see.
But try to go at this with an open-mind, not blinded by posters & flashes of media hype! You will find much of merit here, if you decide not to be bedazzled by flash bulks, that die as quickly as they are clicked into existence!
I was tempted to turn off it straight away, as this midday movie, seemed to be presenting a pathetic uninteresting drama whose subject was unappealing to me. But gradually I chose to involve myself, & soon found it was raising MANY issues relevant to our modern society that the media prefers to snowball into greater injustice!
Nor was I sympathetic to the doctor & his devoted nurse, as against the young staff member who presents herself devoutly committed to the cause, but seems to quickly fade in her significance. The nurse, compassionate to her family, yet daring to care more broadly, seems to become a criminal, in broader eyes of deception that her family & friends struggle to be more than bewildered & frustrated by!
Earlier on, this nurse is noted to be deleting computer files, suspiciously! In her turn, the journalist breaking the story, seeks to reconcile herself with her failed sense of infallibility, & sees shades of grey in her emerging dilemmas! Her confessions to her companion are a stark contrast to the bold pronouncements she continues to make in public media presentations, impressively presented!
I thought I would have liked her, this journalist researching & breaking stories! But I didn't think I would have ever liked the nurse! But she was building into her role of frustrated & toughly imprisoned victim, who might have been adjudged in contempt of court, but was growing into her stature of a media celebrity she was not accustomed to, but daring to nonetheless further the rights of her clients! And those beyond!
While the journalist has her emerging dilemmas coming from within. Like partners yet enemies, in a devolving zone of instability that seems to be much less, for their individual contributions! I think this is a great movie! I haven't even addressed the rights & perspectives of the mother & father, let alone, of the precarious situation of the emerging baby!
Each display their own WORTHINESS of contribution in turn & in time!
Each dare to be courageous in their individual & personal decisions!!!
Look at the father's justified sense of frustration! Look at the mother's tolerance of pain & yet quiet wisdom amidst the furore about her! Look into the eyes of the innocent victim! And still more emerges of mother & father & child, as if in a manger, & bewildered to be there! Imprisons in the modern era, have many boundaries! Look too at a steadfast doctor, & a compassionate nurse & her son & her husband, & a judgemental sensational broader media fury! So confronting & yet so real! As if straight out of Lindy Chamberlain & dingo folklore of contrivance, as presented in, "Through My Eyes", or too in Douglas Woods' journalistic masterpiece exposed in "Cry Freedom" in Nelson Mandela's unlikely escape into freedom! It's all here, in a drama of CRISES we should not react against, but embrace!
Only love is its ultimate conqueror!
But which one will find a salvation in this earthquake zone of uncertainty? I saw what I saw! It's your turn to judge, & see what you might see.
But try to go at this with an open-mind, not blinded by posters & flashes of media hype! You will find much of merit here, if you decide not to be bedazzled by flash bulks, that die as quickly as they are clicked into existence!
One word key to this tv movie: DREADFUL.
afijamesy2k8 October 2001
Yet another tv movie, about cloning, and yet a bad one if that, it stars Bridget Fonda in the rollin, rollin, rollin, rollin, rollin, type performance as the reporter who's women's fetus is a clone , stupid teleplay and a three word line that I Have never seen in the history of tv movies " that beats limp bizkit", which had should have been called My ordinary bizkit, instead of this dreary dull wreck, if only fred durst would have starred in the tv movie instead of this, this tv movie is about as bad as the band.
My Ordinary baby aka" After Amy
Rating: * Star
My Ordinary baby aka" After Amy
Rating: * Star
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
