I love this movie so much

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

After reading some of the other reviews, it became clear to me that this movie hits a nerve for many. Our reactions are varied and emotional, ranging from disgust, panic and confusion to relief, respect and understanding.I was intrigued, so I decided to watch it for myself.A good reviewer will step aside from his own opinions and give the movie a fair shake from an objective point of view.The real strength of the movie is that it pushes and breaks boundaries, which most of us adhere to. We generally believe that following these laws and moral norms will keep children safe, but the truth is that the world has never been safe. Just by living we all agree to this simple truth: life is dangerous.The main protagonist, whose life is falling apart and who is slowly losing his grip, meets a young girl who is essentially being raised how he was. He deeply feels that this is a crime and decides that he will develop a relationship with her that, while wildly inappropriate and even illegal and dangerous, is beneficial to them both. As all relationships do, it takes a turn that both frightens and satisfies them, teaching them about love. Ultimately, it seems that they are soul mates who have found each other. The tragedy is that in this world they cannot be together, because in their current circumstances it was not healthy or safe for either of them. Note that the relationship was not sexual, it doesn't have to be.This movie is well filmed and choreographed. The cinematography is bleak, accompanied by a soundtrack that is mostly atmospheric and moody.. and sometimes scary. All of this is designed to pull you into the hopelessness that both characters feel, while leaving you on the edge of your seat wondering what will happen next.The film has two reasonably large flaws in my opinion: the writing and the direction.The writing was mostly good, but deliberately obtuse. You are not supposed to completely understand what the character of David Lamb is thinking or planning. While we are supposed to think that David and Tommy's relationship develops from a deep understanding, I got the impression that Tommy was confused most of the time. When faced with David's constant deep observations about life, young Tommy seemed honestly dumbstruck. She seemed to take him on faith for most of the film.As for the direction, the film draws on as a slow burner. What's happening next never seems to be a concern, because honestly it's fairly predictable. Aside from the question of Tommy's safety, there is little conflict to deal with. What really boggled me was the relationship that develops between the two characters. It starts off as a simple friendship, then develops into teacher/student, moves easily into father/daughter, and finally dives headlong into unrequited lovers. If I could complain about anything, I would say that the final relationship did not have enough screen time to be adequately explained. It just seemed to happen in a rush and was confusing to me.Now then, The rest of my review is my opinion, feel free to read it or not.Some other reviewers have written this movie off as a simple "defense of pedophilia." I don't see it that way.I haven't lived long, but I've lived long enough to know that love is an inconsiderate thing. It can happen at the wrong time, in the wrong place, even with the wrong person. To make judgments on any other person's love is an arrogance I personally don't engage in. Can it happen between two people, even if one is a child and the other an adult? Of course it can. I won't say whether or not that love is true, it's not my place. I can only say that it is inappropriate given the circumstances. And when it comes to love, many would say circumstances be damned.People who believe that love like this cannot exist between the young and old are completely on the wrong side of history. Relationships between very young and very old people have happened time and time again for generations. Our particular norms for the treatment of children are a very recent inventions, while we mostly agree that they are good things, they are not always right in every single case.Deal with it.

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.

Lamb (2015) is a unique indie drama directed, written and produced by Ross Partridge, who also stars in the film. To be completely honest, I think this film is extremely hard to talk about. At points, I found it extremely uncomfortable. But that's the point. Well acted all around. Oona Laurence and Ross Partridge both gave excellent performances. In addition to great performances, the cinematography was also wonderful. This isn't just a cliché indie drama. The film splits off in a different directions, especially with the ending. I found Lamb to be an extremely memorable movie. Really hard to talk about without spoiling anything. Just go watch it. It's worth your time.

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.