Lamb (2016)

Thanks for the memories!

Load of rubbish!!

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Based on the user reviews and the IMDb message board, most people are uncomfortable with the subject matter and it's portrayal. And they should be.What the main character David Lamb does in this movie, and the way he does it is weird, unusual and uncommon. He is a 47 year old man who essentially kidnaps an 11 year old girl, takes her out of state, lives with her alone in a secluded camp --- with no intention of physical or sexual abuse. He is a product of a bad family. His father is a "Son of a Bitch" (his boss's words). His father shows no interest when David asks him for advice. His mother walked out on the family. His brother was voluntarily homeless, living behind a gas station until he eventually disappeared. David's wife is in the process of divorcing him. He has a beautiful girlfriend who loves him. But he places no value on her or their relationship because he never learned what a good relationship was.He recognizes that Tommie (the eleven year old girl) needs attention because she is engaging in risky behavior and she comes from a family that doesn't care about her. And, she is hanging out with friends that don't care about her either. So, he wants to nurture her and show her things she wouldn't otherwise see. But, he goes about it all wrong because he doesn't know what a healthy relationship consists of. So, as a result, he unintentionally emotionally and psychologically abuses her. And they both end up worse off for their time together. The point of this movie --- intentionally or not --- is that "Good Family is Important". But many people may not recognize this. Because today's society is rife with bad families, broken families and no families. This may be "one" reason why there is so much sociopathic behavior --- immorality, unethical behavior, crime, inhumanity, emotional, psychological, mental disease, etc.The point being, if he had come from a good family, his life would not have been such a mess and he wouldn't be looking to mentor an 11 year old street kid. And if he did, he would have done it in an appropriate manner. Not the way he ended up doing it.And if she had come from a good family, she would not have been on the street engaging in risky behavior with kids that didn't care about her. She would have been involved in healthy activities with family and friends who did care about her. And none of this would have happened. This is a movie for adults, not children. It is uncomfortable to watch. It is a tragedy. There is no violence, action or special effects. But there is nudity and sex. And plenty of unhealthy behavior. The acting and cinematography are good. But it is about unhappy and unhealthy people. And the story goes from bad to worse.I agree with many viewers that this is a hard movie to rate. If you are a mature adult looking for an interesting depiction of an uncommon, unhealthy social situation, I might even give this movie a 10.But if you are just a normal viewer looking for light, happy, positive entertainment, this is not the movie for you.

SPOILERS GALORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have seen many films about inter-generational romances. Some are wonderful, some creepy...I first would like to say that this film is no "Lolita" (excepting the road trip aspect and living in motels) and it is surely not the Academy Award Best Film of 1962, Sundays and Cybele (Les Dimanches de Ville d'Avray) probably the greatest film about inter generational love ever made and now available on Criterion Bluray.That being said, I am hoping the official DVD/Bluray release may have a director's commentary, as the film is really a Rorschach test given by the director to the viewer. There is no sexual abuse in this film, though where the relationship was heading had not David sever all ties with Tommie is a matter of opinion, but in the end, he did worse..emotional abuse...No one can be sure what David's ultimate intentions were...maybe he himself was not sure.. In a way, he was a kid running a way from home and wanted a companionLikewise, he would do anything to keep the farce of this illusional relationship going at all costs, so keeping Tommie hidden was justification for that desire, and Tommie too was complicit until she actually got jealous when she realizes that he still (in her mind) thought of her as a kid.While I am sure Tommie, as an innocent 11 year old did not actually want a sexual relationship with David, unconsciously and in her budding sexuality, she wanted him to want her as a woman.I think however, the man had a plan, or had a plan which there were to be a couple of outcomes.First, I want to establish a few things.. I don't think that initially he thought of Tommie as a sexual object, but definitely one he could mold, or "save" even though he couldn't "save" himself, or maybe he could, by giving Tommie the gifts of being needed, and to expand her horizons from the bleak existence she had.Some very important scenes provide insight about both David and Tommie's persona.When Tommie is shaving her legs (surely not actually as she was clearly not in that stage of puberty) but to mimic being a woman the way a young boy picks up his father's razor.This is also why she screams at him when he wants to bath her. Not because she is embarrassed by nudity, as much as being treated like a small child.This is further exemplified by her reaction of catching him making love to his girlfriend. NOT in disgust or fear that an innocent child might view it, but as a person who is told she is "equal partners" yet sees that in his eyes, she is not.Whether she as a girl-child actually wanted to have sex with him was probably unconscious if at all, but the need to be "desired" was, and her need to act, and feel grownup is apparent throughout the film.I think the ending is somewhat ambiguous on purpose, but there are clues.While Tommie's life is going nowhere, and David attempts to show her the beautiful world beyond, his intent backfires when she is, by circumstances bound to him, and in a way, is "in love" with him.So does the age old adage, "Tis better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all, apply here?"The very last shot is of her bag, still laying on the sidewalk where she left it running after David's car. This might imply that it is left behind,as she does catch up to David and he relents and takes her away.You know that he sees her running after him by the shot of her running in his side mirror.This would be the "fairy tale ending.Another possibility is that good directors never put in scenes or props that have no significance. That being said...there was a rifle....and also some very "poetic" parting words.One earlier scene which might establish David becoming further unhinged in this temporary Utopian fantasy is that after considering the nosy neighbor to be a threat to his concocted world, he sneaks into the neighbor's backyard with his rifle. Was he planing to shoot the guy? Why was he there at all, spying on him, and with a gun? Only when he sees the dying wife and is reminded of his father does he back off.When Davis realizes that his fantasy is over, and that he has harmed, rather than helped Tommie, he knows what he has to do.The clues are the gun, the "willing" his cabin to Tommie, and he would never see her again, but he will be with her always..in the wind, nature, etc. Sounds like a man who knows what he is going to do and there is no turning back....David is going back to the cabin to kill himself.THAT is what I believe the ending is... out of the 3 choices, David and Tommie go on with life apart, or she does catch up with him and they ride off into the sunset, or Tommie is totally broken, at least at first, and David ends it all, not being able to live with himself for what he did, and not being able to fix it.Tommie also has a few choices, to remain broken, and feeling used by David, or that she can sense that he did try to give her something she would never have in her world before they met, and would use that experience, bittersweet as it was to become empowered.

The movie, as a movie, it is not so bad. I can even say that sometimes beautifully shot. The subject of it, however, utterly disturbing and unsettling. It is about a 40 something man's love for an 11 year old girl. There is no sexual abuse - obviously -, otherwise it would have never arrived to the big screen. That said, from the very start of the story, the "sexual" concept is all above it, cautiously managing a very thin line between "happen" and "not happen". Worst thing of all that, however want to explain it, it is child abuse, if not physically, mentally surely. And that's what makes me really sick about it. No one, in his right mind, should ever do that to a child. And that's sums it all up. In the final scene, you can see an again abandoned little child running after a car, emotionally drained, desperately trying to catch something she could never have. And the man who did this to her, just drives away. Very, very bad. I don't give a .... about the man. In my opinion he is as bad as he can be. But the child - that's more than heartbreaking.

Masterful. I loved this film. The best part is reading the equivocating, hesitant reviews after watching the film. This is a Rorschach test! This film holds up a mirror to us and what we see isn't pretty. Consider the facts: Fact one - from the start, David Lamb is a liar. Ross Partridge, the director/actor, makes that clear. David's wife has had enough and we don't even see her. David starts the film lying to his girlfriend about where he is. And David has been lying to everyone at work about a prohibited liaison with a subordinate. Fact two – Partridge has carefully chosen the two female leads to be similar in demeanor and appearance. Why? To pose a question – why does David prefer one to the other? Both care about him, listen to him even dote over him. And, most importantly, one is a grown woman who willingly satisfies his carnal desires. And finally, fact three – the film documents a rape. Forget the lush fields, mountains and horses and forget about the fact that he never "penetrates" her, you know in today's political parlance, "rape, rape." Tommie a neglected, perhaps abused child is by the end of the film a woman. You know, in other words, he raped her. That is why David preferred her to the adult woman – Tommie was a virgin.