So much average

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

"Girl 27" is a fascinating story of Hollywood history and the workings of the studios. The studios owned Hollywood: the police, the DA, all the way up. The movie magazines were studio organs. They had private hospitals, doctors on payroll. Anything could be hidden.Patricia Douglas was a young girl working in Hollywood as a dancer. "I moved like J.Lo" she tells the interviewer, David Stenn. One day she and some other women were asked to report to what they believed to be a film set, and they were sent to Western Costume to get costumes. When they arrived on the "set," it was a convention on a farm for MGM salespeople. Patricia Douglas was raped by one of them in a field. It was hushed up, and the doctor, under MGM's influence, put in her record that she had been treated for VD.Patricia attempted to sue but lost, so she took it to Federal Court. MGM bribed her mother and lawyer to make the case go away, and they did. The lawyer never showed up in court any time the case was called. Her mother got a liquor store out of it.At the time of the documentary, Patricia Douglas was 84, living alone in Las Vegas, when she was found by writer-producer Stenn. At first he spoke with her on the phone - she would say so much and then hang up abruptly. Finally she agreed to meet him and tell her story.There have been many complaints about Stenn's presence in this film. I used to work for David Stenn. When he says he loves Patricia Douglas, he's not playing nice to get the story at all. He's not that kind of person. As for his presence in the film, she would only talk to him, so he was stuck there - yes, he could have cut himself out. In the beginning, I think he had to lay the foundation as he did - he is a film historian, an expert on MGM and that era. Did he have to mention Jackie Onassis? Probably not, but I think it made his credentials all the more impressive.There's nothing uncommon in a documentary about looking at records and having someone go over them with you. So maybe in total, five minutes of Stenn could have been cut. I do not think he took away from this woman's agonizing story.Not only is this a searing documentary about the machinations of MGM and Mayer, it is such a sad commentary on the time during which Patricia Douglas was young. Families swept incidents such as rape under the rug. There was no place she could go for help. She was never able to move on. It ruined her life. She said she was frigid. She was married three times; she wanted a child desperately to love and be loved, yet she gave the child to someone else to raise. She couldn't get too close to anyone.Her beautiful daughter tells a sad story about their relationship or lack of it. Patricia never told anyone what had happened to her. When the story broke in Vanity Fair, she told her mother that she was so incredibly proud of her. And her mother said nothing.It's such a tragic account, it breaks your heart. An entire live ruined. Patricia could have tried to move on, but how does one do that when violated and no one acknowledges it? When everyone expects you to act as if nothing's wrong? The studio heads were sleazes. When I interviewed actress Rita Gam, an incredibly beautiful woman even today, she said she received many offers from Hollywood. But she smartly waited until she was offered a contract for $1250 a week. Why? Because if you made less than that, she said, you were part of the "visiting firemen" circuit, in other words, a prostitute. Starlets were expected to sleep with men for jobs, and at the behest of the studio. Even Rita Hayworth's husband tried to pimp her out to Harry Cohn.I think the story overrides David Stenn's presence in the film, which some find offensive. Personally I didn't mind it. I loved the film clips that were interjected. A nice touch to a horrible story.

Regardless of any 'errors' or liberties the director may have taken, understand that this is a TRUE story of a minor, a 17-year old girl, who was raped and had the courage to attempt to seek justice. Nevertheless, the psychological effects of rape in that era (1937) had a ripple effect in her life. It touched and destroyed nearly every aspect of her life. The lessons to be learned deal with courage, integrity, honestly, and communication. If possible, I highly recommend watching on DVD so you have access to the director's commentary. Go ahead and read the harsh reviews - examine the criticism and you will discover nit-picking and diversion from the good that you will gain from a viewing.

Girl 27 (2007) **** (out of 4) Rather sad documentary taking a look at a 1937 MGM case where Patricia Douglas was hired to appear in a movie at Hal Roach Studios but instead she was raped by a man and the crime was eventually covered up. This case made headlines at the time as Douglas was attacked but then the case pretty much went away for over six decades until director David Stenn heard about the case and was able to locate the woman. I've seen quite a few documentaries on MGM and it's clear looking at the studio today that they owned Los Angeles and that they weren't afraid to do harmful things (look at Judy Garland) or cover things up. This story here is just downright shocking because it makes everything so clear that MGM was calling the shots on everything and they were strong enough to have cops, politicians and lawyers in their pockets. I think what's so sad about this movie is the interview with the then 85-year-old Douglas who is clearly still haunted by the events that happened to her when she was 17. Seeing how this event damaged her life is just sad and seeing and hearing from her daughter isn't any more happy. The film has a very low-budget that does effect it somewhat but it never takes away from the power of the story. I also really liked how the director shows how the system worked back in the day and this includes showing how Douglas was being attacked by the media while Loretta Young was allowed to lie about an adoption when everyone knew that Clark Gable and her had the kid. Their daughter, Judy Lewis, is interviewed here as is Peggy Montgomery (aka Baby Peggy) who talks about the trouble that girls found themselves in at the studio. GIRL 27 is high drama from start to finish and I think it's an important story to tell no matter how ugly that story is.

I was glad to see that many of the other comments felt like I did - that this was a very compelling story - a story that should be brought to light, but that it is very badly handled by the inexperienced filmmaker. Now David Stenn is a talented writer and my friends who devour Hollywood biographies speak very highly of his (I believe he's written about Clara Bow and other big Hollywood Golden Era stars) and it is interesting how he came across this awful scandal that was covered up by MGM but he seems to not trust the power of poor Ms. Douglas' story and I actually was cringing with the horrid decision to add Hollywood movie clips of women being shaken or slapped or pushed down (from various fiction films) - as Ms. Douglas begins to tell of the actual sexual assault and how it destroyed her - the forced clips almost seemed to parody what was happening (which I am sure is the opposite effect the director wanted). The way the story is told, the way he films a lot of the interviews - it is just amateurish. I read the article Stenn wrote in Vanity Fair and that is much more complex and fascinating than the film. Hollywood truly had the power to sweep all of its dirty secrets under a large rug and this story is a perfect example of that. Ms. Douglas was a very brave woman to even try and stand up to MGM but of course they crushed her with newspaper lies and huge powerful law firms. The film is still worth watching because of the subject matter but as far as documentary skill - it truly fails.