User Reviews

Dr Mahmoodys attempt to discredit his ex wife is intellectual but farcical.

If you read the book 'For The Love Of A Child' it is clear to see that Betty does not seek to create propaganda. She paints Moody and his affections prior to entering Iran in a fantastic light and repeatedly counsels Mahtob, ensuring that her daughter embraces her Persian roots and does not hold her father in contempt.

If the details of Bettys account were not true, why would she have taken her daughter on such a perilous journey to escape? Why would she have allowed her daughter to live in a country that demoralises women and hates Americans? Had Betty been lying Dr Moody would have successfully sued her for libel. Again, to cite her second book, friends of Moody have confirmed details in her story.

Sweeping cultural generalizations aside... I can say this much, that I grew up just down the block from Betty Mahmooody and I can count on one hand the number of times I saw her in almost 20 years. As a kid I used to ask why she never came out of her house, and why I never saw her coming or going or getting the mail, and my mom told me she was scared her old husband might find her and try to hurt her or take her daughter again. I can tell you she was afraid or very changed by her experiences, and that the way she lived was not in the manner or style of a lying gold digger as some reviews have called her. Even if so, which I don't believe, does wanting to marry into money (not that it is admirable) mean that a person deserves to be beaten, abused, held captive, and have their rights stripped? How silly and disproportionate, it is like stoning someone to death for stealing a tube of lipstick. Sexism is still alive when so many people just want to write off what a woman said because she is a "golddigger" or a "slut" or whatever. Ridiculous. I am not so quick to believe this film, perhaps he did want to see his daughter desperately and did seek her, but many abusive persons are possessive and even have an aspect of "loving" who they harm. He abandoned his right to her when he raised a hand to her mother, and I feel no tears should be shed for any paternal pain he may or may not feel.

This documentary is a plodding presentation that intends to tell the "side" of Sayed Bozorg Mahmoody who I had previously known as the villain in "Not Without My Daughter". The cameras follow this villain through Iran and Finland, documenting his efforts at contacting his only child Mahtob. By the finish of it I know him as an old man beaten down by time and circumstances. He is a father whose heart is breaking, with a wish to see his child and reconcile with her before he dies, and maybe, just maybe, get in the last word.

In the end this movie is no more or no less credible than "Not Without My Daughter" and it leaves so many questions unanswered. There are always 2 sides to every story I suppose, and it is worth seeing simply for that purpose, to see the other side.

Mahmoody is telling the truth. I know him personally. He was my mom's colleague in a hospital in Iran. Not without my daughter is a part of a propaganda. I have two reasons: -Compare this movie with those produced before the Islamic revolution about Iran and Iranians. You can see the contrast between this and those. The image of the Iranian man/woman in this one is the opposite side of those. Howcome Iranians became such brutal people in a decade? -If u see the real Dr. Mahmoody, even in this documentary, it is totally different than what Betty showed in hers. The real Mahmoody is a little guy which is not tough at all. When u make a movie based on a true story, you have to simulate things as much as possible close to reality. In my opinion, the actor used in the movie to play Dr. Mahmoody's rule, was chosen on purpose ti make the whole thing more acceptable. Because a Mahmoody like the real one cannot scare the audience that much. -Other than all those things, I bet a lot of you guys have Iranian neighbours (especially in US). Do u really find all of those close to how Betty wants you to see them?

I just finished reading the book "Not Without My Daughter". I feel her pain fighting for her and her daughter's freedom, and the anger she felt hearing those people chanting and wishing her fellow countrymen dead. However, I notice one thing that doesn't sit right with her story. First of all, she noticed that this man was emotionally unstable and controlling back when they were still in the States, yet still...she stayed and even went to Iran with him. Did it ever cross her mind to just get a divorce? Of course he would have had visitation right, but I figure it wouldn't be that easy for him to kidnap an American citizen and bring their daughter to Iran without her permission. Or maybe the allure of a lifestyle as "doctor's wife", as she repeatedly mentioned and obviously cherished, blinded her to all those early signs? Second of all, she married an Iranian, regardless how Americanized he was. Why didn't she bother to learn more about his culture before she decided to marry him? Just because they live differently, I strongly disagree with her claim of superiority in "civilization" just because she knows which utensils to use. Despite my deep sympathy to her fight against the law in Iran, at the end...I only see a gold digger got herself in big trouble because of her love for status, money and jewelries. I would think, if I was fleeing for safety, fighting for my freedom, I wouldn't have bothered with jewelries and tapestry. Geesh!