Sorry, this movie sucks

Admirable film.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The story about two judges in Northeast Pennsylvania destroying lives is a very compelling story. However, how the film told this story left me rather cold for a variety of reasons. The story focuses mostly on Judge Ciavarella--a judge known for throwing the book (so to speak) at kids with minor offenses as well as, reportedly, sending kids to a juvenile detention facility in which he had a financial interest. In essence, folks said he was getting cash for sending kids there. It also talks, to a much lesser extent, on another judge, Michael Conahan. Both admitted to taking money from this private juvenile prison--but both make a wide variety of excuses for what they did.So why didn't I like the documentary more? Well the biggest problem is that the film allowed Judge Ciavarella way too much time...way too much. While he admitted to 'making mistakes', he mostly just made excuses and tried to talk his way out of actions that clearly were NOT ethical or legal. But by allowing him so much time and by allowing him to say things often unchallenged tended to seriously diminish from the message--such as 'I wasn't as bad as they say'. He was a judge for goodness sake and he sentenced children to prison with reckless abandon! The story clearly would have been much stronger had they given more than just a small number of cases where the judge seemed to have overstepped reasonable sentencing to show more of a pattern. The cases they gave were pretty egregious--kids who should have, at most, received minor suspensions being sent away for years! So quibbling about did he or did he not get paid for each kid he sent is a real distraction--he did destroy some kids who clearly were not yet delinquents and this should have been more the focus. After all, 2480 juvenile cases have SINCE been overturned or expunged! THAT should have been the point--driven home again and again.The bottom line is that a documentary should galvanize the audience towards or against something--this one just left you feeling a bit ambivalent. I could see some watching this and thinking the judges weren't all that bad! With 15 and 28 year sentences, I'd say that's really BAD.By the way, I did like the music.

In the past 20 years or so, documentary films seem to have become as much about the films' directors as they are about their subjects (Michael Moore, Nick Broomfield, et al.). This absolutely compelling film feels almost nostalgic in its straight-ahead, no-frills documentary film style. When this scandal finally reached its resolution in 2011, I very much hoped that a skilled documentary filmmaker would dig into this awful story to reveal how this absolute desecration of the American judicial system was allowed to happen. And that is just what director, Robert May, has given us, with his marvelously incisive--yet amazingly impartial--feature- length documentary, "Kids For Cash". The most amazing thing of all, May was somehow granted what seemed to be fairly unlimited access to both of the disgraces jurists, Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella-- in addition to the victims and their families. I'm almost ashamed to admit, I actually started feeling pity for Ciavarella--and found myself sort of "buying" his "Poor me" act! But by the end of the film, it becomes quite clear that both men are pathological liars and/or are so completely deluded, they really DON'T believe they've done anything wrong (though that is highly, highly unlikely). More than that, it shows the human wreckage that can be wrought by just a few corrupt opportunists, with zero compassion or care for the hundreds of lives they ruin, for their own enrichment. The film has a "happy ending" for those who appreciate justice. And I can only wish that these tormented victims, whose youth was robbed from them, can find peace in knowing that these monsters will likely only leave their prison, feet-first, in a pine box. To Charlie, Justin, Hillary, Amanda--and the late Ed-- and the countless hundreds of other Pennsylvania youths whose young lives were shattered by these sociopathic monsters, God bless you all, and I hope you know that you can overcome this awful chapter. Those bastards lives are over-- and now, it's time for yours to begin! Brilliant film--a total TEN.

Kids for Cash is a neat documentary covering the unfolding of the "Kids for Cash" scandal in Luzern country, PA, where two judges sent more than two thousand children to a juvenile detention center while getting paybacks from the private operation of the same facility.The filmmakers had personal access to both accused judges, who gave lengthy interviews on camera. However, the producers didn't let that fact cloud their views on the whole affair as it is common in such productions. Instead, we have several interviews with young victims of the scheme and their parents.What is not so good about the movie are is the parallelism of the stories of victims they follow. The cut points on the narratives look hastily put together instead of carefully chosen to permeate the viewer to the individuality and commonality of each story. At the end, viewers are left with the impression of two corrupt men who genuinely think they weren't doing anything wrong other than some minor procedural violations. Although not the main theme of the documentary, one is left to wonder how horrendously normalized it had become to just take "bad kids" away from school and send them to correctional facilities.

This is a beautifully made film about the huge judicial scandal that became known as "kids for cash." Basically, two judges in Pennsylvania secretly received millions of dollars from the owners of a for-profit prison for juveniles in their jurisdiction, while at the same time pulling strings to give the prison a monopoly on juvenile detentions and (in the case of one of the judges) sentencing hundreds (literally, hundreds) of juveniles to years of incarceration in the same prison, without due process and often for truly minor misbehavior.The documentary tells its story through interviews, news footage, and a limited number of title cards. There is no narrator, and the voice(s) of the interviewer(s) are not heard. The focus is on five of the hundreds of teenagers who were imprisoned in this scam: Charlie Balasavage, Justin Bodnar, Hillary Transue, Edward Kenzakoski, and Amanda Lorah. The interviews with the victims are heartbreaking. We also hear from the two judges (Ciavarella and Conahan), who allowed themselves to be interviewed for the film while the federal cases against them were pending. In some ways, this footage, while infuriating to watch, was the most interesting aspect of the film. Among the other interviewees are Terrie Morgan, the reporter who mainly covered the scandal for the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader (and who serves as a de facto narrator), and Marsha Levick and Robert Schwartz, two attorneys with the non-profit Juvenile Law Center who worked to have the cases affected by the scandal vacated.The events covered here present dangerously rich material for a filmmaker. Should the story be about money? About power? About the juvenile justice system in general? The one weakness of the film is that it moves around among all of these themes without clearly digging into any of them. The opening and closing title sequences suggest that the third, broadest theme is the focus. But if so, why use the damage caused by two judges who were clearly corrupt as the vehicle?Despite that flaw, the film deserves 8 stars for its excellent production values and, most of all, the powerful interview footage, which brings home the effects the scam has had on so many lives.