Customer Reviews

Snap Decision

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

First saw this on The Family Channel around 2000 or 2001. The story is about a mother who gets into trouble when some photos taken by a family-friend is developed at a photo lab.

The technician decides to report the photos since it seems to portray "innappropriate" images of young girls. The mom then faces some unfair accusations regarding the treatment of her daughters.

Good movie to reflect on the current state of this world. The DVD itself contains the movie trailer along with a Star Biograhies.

I love Mare Willingham and everything I've seen with her in it I have loved. I would recommend this film to all and especially to those with with young children. It clearly shows that even family pictures need to be taken with caution in the world we live in, sad but true. Mare protrays a great mom who couldn't love her children more but could lose everything.Diane

Mare Winningham and Felicity Huffman are powerfully convincing in this movie, which is based on a true story. This controversial story is about interpretation...and the events that take place are great lead-ins for you to start up an in-depth discussion afterwards. I am a firm believer in our justice system...but it sure is amazing how a person's life can be so dependent upon the interpretations of a judge and a jury. Did Mare and Felicity take the pictures? Watch the movie...and you can be the judge!

Sometimes, the most seemingly innocent aspects of life can land us into the deepest trouble. This film offers a blatant reminder of how vulnerable we can be when the legal system invades our lives.
Carrie Dixon (Felicity Huffman) and Jen Bradley (Mare Winningham) are lifelong friends. Dixon, a professional photographer, visits Bradley and her three children in Cincinnati. On the first morning of her visit, Dixon snaps a series of pictures of the scantily-clad kids as they jump on her bed and run amok around the house. Upon her return to Chicago, she drops off the film at a local photo lab. During processing, the photo technician is horrified when she sees the images of naked and semi-naked young girls. Worried about her potential liability in the matter, the photo tech contacts the police. After interviewing Dixon about the contents of the film, the Chicago detective closes his case against Dixon. He then sends the photos to the Cincinnati police for follow-up.
Thus begins Jen Bradley's legal nightmare.
Within hours of Carrie Dixon's ordeal in Chicago, Jen Bradley finds Child Protective Services on her doorstep with a court order demanding immediate removal of the children from her custody. The kids are temporarily placed with their grandparents, pending the outcome of interviews with a child psychologist. After questioning the children, the psychologist - satisfied that no sexual improprieties have occurred, recommends that they be returned to their mother. The social worker files her report and closes her case. Unfortunately, this story is far from over.
Detective Collins (played by Chelcie Ross) of the Cincinnati Police is assigned to - and becomes obsessed with - the case.
When Jen Bradley fails to appear for an interview in his office, he issues a warrant for her arrest. At this time, she is charged with four counts of felony child abuse and child pornography. After a grand jury indictment levels the same charges,
Jen finds herself facing a possible fifty-year prison sentence.
"The law requires that the photographs be deemed offensive to the prevailing standards in the adult community with respect to what is suitable activity for juveniles." Unfortunately for Jen, a focus group representing potential jurors deems the pictures to be offensive. After this finding, Jen decides to avoid a jury trial, opting instead for a hearing before a judge.
At the hearing, a courtroom argument ensues as to what should and shouldn't be considered pornographic. The prosecutor, who has blown up, cropped and manipulated the photos, successfully turns this key evidence into something quite offensive. In the end, Jen Bradley must take the stand and explain the circumstances behind each of the thirty-six incriminating photos.
To avoid spoiling the outcome of the story, I'll stop here. If you want to know more, you'll have to get the flick!
"Snap Decision" was very loosely based on a true story. The actual events centered around a photographer whose seven-year-old daughter took naked pictures of a young playmate, thrusting her mother into legal turmoil.
This is a thought-provoking and compelling movie. The script is believable; the acting is superb. I would give it more than five stars if I could. I highly recommend "Snap Decision."

This is a mild, compared to real life, portrail of how slanted the facts can be shown by those who are supposed to protect the people. This movie shows how a single parent can be targeted by the legal system of lawyers who want nothing more than to put a notch on their belt to show what heros they are while "saving the children" from those who love them the most.
Well acted and realisticlly portrayed.

This is a moving story of a mother who is wrongly accused of child pornography. She fights the justice system and wins. The sad thing is you must be careful of the pictures you take of your kids because the wrong person could interpt it the wrong way.

This was a great movie too watch.
but then again anything felictiy huffman is in is great

it was a great movie...
i dont know how many times ive seen it before but the actign
by both the actresses is pretty amzing

It's truly amazing how human mind could easily be conned & fixed at anything we perceive, which we believe is the truth. Looking from different perspectives at an issue not only lets us know the truth at the end, but also provides us immense opportunities to form unbaised views and arguments that support different points of view. This story truly exemplifies how different perceptions could lead to the unthinkable! I wonder why at some point in the film, when Jen was questioned about her failure to effectively stop her kids being photographed, she wasn't convincing. I bet she could've said, "If at that moment, I had thought it had a morbid element to the scenario in question, I would've really stopped it at once!". Or in other words, she was perceptive of the inadvertent incident (pretty much innocent), and so she had no idea of the unforseen consequences! One thing really bewilders me... how could such a regular customer be turned in by the photo lab? Heartless, as I would personally call the character. (again, no offense it's truly my perception.. ha ha..)