And that's why we loved "The Beatles" because their songs were invitation to a better world, one different from our reality. But Jessie Nelson's "I Am Sam" approach the Beatles like a real Gospel of life.
This well-meaning drama is about the group's number-one fan: Sam, a Starbucks Coffee employee with the mind of a 7-year old child fighting for the custody of his daughter of the same age, needless to say that we're supposed to root for him. His lawyer played by a Michelle Pfeiffer, starts like your typical shallow, self-centered, publicity-seeking executive women who, learns in the process one thing or two about love. Love, that's the film's motto, the whole purpose of the film is to prove that one's ability to love is enough to raise a child.
I'm sorry but as a parent of a four-year old little girl, it's not true. The film mixes up two elements in a way that insults intelligence: loving and raising. One is a matter of the heart, it's something of universal value that transcends the barriers, but rising is a practical thing, requiring a decent amount of both mental and physical ability. It is such a painstaking occupation you can't deal with it alone, whether you're Sam, a blind woman or even two parents. But this movie wants to make us believe that love is the one and only requirement. The premise is fallacious from the start.
Critics pointed out that the film makes an effort to show a father capable of taking of her child despite his handicap. Actually, the film can't even afford to be manipulative, as it contradicts the very points it tries to make, some situations were so embarrassing that I started to question very early whether this film was serious or a joke? Starting with the birth, Lucy's mother doesn't even have a glimpse on her child and she leaves the hospital as if she had just thrown a used Kleenex on a trashcan. And Sam leaves the hospital with the baby in his arms!!!
People leave a hospital with a baby in a Moses' basket or in the mother's arms if they're going to a car or a cab. That sight of Sam with little Lucy in his arms, in the middle of a subway, exposing her to all the germs of the world and with no one being ever worried about it, it could look like a kidnapping after all, killed all the film's credibility. If the point was to show a capable father, well it's a fail. Later, he can't understand why his daughter is crying and needs the help of Annie, the benevolent next-door neighbor, to tell him that she needs to eat every two hours.
Didn't he know? Didn't he prepare her birth? Didn't he train from diaper-changing? Does this guy have any family? How much time did pass before Annie came? Before you ask too many questions, the film makes a convenient ellipse with the Beatles' music in the background (the musical leitmotif) Lucy grew up and turns out to be a bright little girl, played very well by Dakota Fanning. From this chronological leap, we've got to assume that nothing went wrong until she started to outsmart Sam, and refuses to learn anything to stay on his level.
You can tell the writers needed to make this as pivotal as possible; he's also arrested in a weird scene involving a prostitute, which raises a social worker's attention. Loretta Devine plays the 'bad guy' part while we're supposed to feel in comfort when Sam goes buy shoes to his little girl, with his friends also suffering from mental handicap, some played by actors. Not every girl has a mother but I know shopping and buying clothes is a girl or a woman thing. I refuse to believe that Sam doesn't know any woman who could go have a woman-to-woman moment with Lucy. Seeing little girl surrounded by a bunch of grown-up adults talking weird isn't heart-warming, it is downright creepy.
Or at least, that's what the directing applies, what's with all the weird camera short and hand-held filming (with some weird zooms), you can tell some parts want to make you 'aaw' well it's either embarrassing to watch or unintentionally funny. The performance of Sean Penn has been deemed as 'full retard' by "Tropic Thunder" and you can tell it's the kind of one-note approach that doesn't work in movies, especially since he's not always in the same level of smartness, he's capable of detecting hidden messages beneath the Beatles songs, but sometimes, he can't even handle a client in his Starbucks shop. His level of mental retard fluctuates according to the requirements of the plot.
The whole experience of "I Am Sam" feels like someone tried to make a film in the same vein than "Philadelphia" with the subplot involving the lawyer. But even Michelle Pfeiffer can't save this and I thought she was too miscast, she's just too 'beautiful" for that face; they made an effort to make her so appealing to the camera it was distracting. As for the message, well, we're supposed to believe that Sam is capable, because of the Power of Love.
I'm sorry but I agreed with the prosecutor and in the one scene where he asked Annie a valid question about Sam's capability to raise Lucy when she'll reach puberty. Annie eludes the answer and asks him if he would (as if the issue was gender) and instead of asking the question again, the prosecutor turns into a sort of villain who asks a sensitive question about Annie's personal background. She cries, she becomes the victim, and the question is left unanswered.
That's the film in a nutshell, too many good sentiments preventing the good questions to find answers while they're too obvious not to be seen.
This well-meaning drama is about the group's number-one fan: Sam, a Starbucks Coffee employee with the mind of a 7-year old child fighting for the custody of his daughter of the same age, needless to say that we're supposed to root for him. His lawyer played by a Michelle Pfeiffer, starts like your typical shallow, self-centered, publicity-seeking executive women who, learns in the process one thing or two about love. Love, that's the film's motto, the whole purpose of the film is to prove that one's ability to love is enough to raise a child.
I'm sorry but as a parent of a four-year old little girl, it's not true. The film mixes up two elements in a way that insults intelligence: loving and raising. One is a matter of the heart, it's something of universal value that transcends the barriers, but rising is a practical thing, requiring a decent amount of both mental and physical ability. It is such a painstaking occupation you can't deal with it alone, whether you're Sam, a blind woman or even two parents. But this movie wants to make us believe that love is the one and only requirement. The premise is fallacious from the start.
Critics pointed out that the film makes an effort to show a father capable of taking of her child despite his handicap. Actually, the film can't even afford to be manipulative, as it contradicts the very points it tries to make, some situations were so embarrassing that I started to question very early whether this film was serious or a joke? Starting with the birth, Lucy's mother doesn't even have a glimpse on her child and she leaves the hospital as if she had just thrown a used Kleenex on a trashcan. And Sam leaves the hospital with the baby in his arms!!!
People leave a hospital with a baby in a Moses' basket or in the mother's arms if they're going to a car or a cab. That sight of Sam with little Lucy in his arms, in the middle of a subway, exposing her to all the germs of the world and with no one being ever worried about it, it could look like a kidnapping after all, killed all the film's credibility. If the point was to show a capable father, well it's a fail. Later, he can't understand why his daughter is crying and needs the help of Annie, the benevolent next-door neighbor, to tell him that she needs to eat every two hours.
Didn't he know? Didn't he prepare her birth? Didn't he train from diaper-changing? Does this guy have any family? How much time did pass before Annie came? Before you ask too many questions, the film makes a convenient ellipse with the Beatles' music in the background (the musical leitmotif) Lucy grew up and turns out to be a bright little girl, played very well by Dakota Fanning. From this chronological leap, we've got to assume that nothing went wrong until she started to outsmart Sam, and refuses to learn anything to stay on his level.
You can tell the writers needed to make this as pivotal as possible; he's also arrested in a weird scene involving a prostitute, which raises a social worker's attention. Loretta Devine plays the 'bad guy' part while we're supposed to feel in comfort when Sam goes buy shoes to his little girl, with his friends also suffering from mental handicap, some played by actors. Not every girl has a mother but I know shopping and buying clothes is a girl or a woman thing. I refuse to believe that Sam doesn't know any woman who could go have a woman-to-woman moment with Lucy. Seeing little girl surrounded by a bunch of grown-up adults talking weird isn't heart-warming, it is downright creepy.
Or at least, that's what the directing applies, what's with all the weird camera short and hand-held filming (with some weird zooms), you can tell some parts want to make you 'aaw' well it's either embarrassing to watch or unintentionally funny. The performance of Sean Penn has been deemed as 'full retard' by "Tropic Thunder" and you can tell it's the kind of one-note approach that doesn't work in movies, especially since he's not always in the same level of smartness, he's capable of detecting hidden messages beneath the Beatles songs, but sometimes, he can't even handle a client in his Starbucks shop. His level of mental retard fluctuates according to the requirements of the plot.
The whole experience of "I Am Sam" feels like someone tried to make a film in the same vein than "Philadelphia" with the subplot involving the lawyer. But even Michelle Pfeiffer can't save this and I thought she was too miscast, she's just too 'beautiful" for that face; they made an effort to make her so appealing to the camera it was distracting. As for the message, well, we're supposed to believe that Sam is capable, because of the Power of Love.
I'm sorry but I agreed with the prosecutor and in the one scene where he asked Annie a valid question about Sam's capability to raise Lucy when she'll reach puberty. Annie eludes the answer and asks him if he would (as if the issue was gender) and instead of asking the question again, the prosecutor turns into a sort of villain who asks a sensitive question about Annie's personal background. She cries, she becomes the victim, and the question is left unanswered.
That's the film in a nutshell, too many good sentiments preventing the good questions to find answers while they're too obvious not to be seen.