I Love You, Daddy

People unable to separate the work of art from the private life of the author boycott this film only to their own detriment. Maybe "I Love You, Daddy" is not a masterpiece of the seventh art, but it is certainly a film worth watching, an intelligent and brave story that makes you think and refuses to bow to puritanism and the modern version of the witch hunt.

A successful television scriptwriter (Louis C. K.) is a spineless divorced man who has turned his daughter (Chloë Grace Moretz) into a spoiled manipulator. But when his seventeen-year-old princess begins to fall for his idol, a seventy-year-old filmmaker with a reputation as a pedophile (John Malkovich), he realizes he has to tighten the reins.

Parenthood, growing up (both daughter and father), diverse male-female relationships and bridging generational gaps, drawing the line between conservative prejudices and common sense, an obvious thematic homage to Woody Allen (who was offered the role, which luckily was eventually played by Malkovich), and a stylistic and acting homage to the golden age of Hollywood, all of this is very nicely packed into an atmospheric and somewhat philosophical film, which many criticized for not having a clear point and message. But I think that this is precisely where its strength lies, because life itself does not have a clear point and message, and this film portrays it very honestly and without restraint.

Old-fashioned and modern at the same time, this is a movie you'll love if you loved Woody Allen, or maybe the TV series "Californication," with which it also shares actress Pamela Adlon. I watched the movie primarily because of Chloe and, although I have no major complaints about her performance, I was much more impressed by John Malkovich and Rose Byrne, and Louis himself in roles of screenwriter, director, and lead actor. Warm recommendation.

7/10.

I hope this movie is looked back upon in a very unique way in film history. It was essentially blacklisted, justified or not, for it's creator abusing his privilege and gender, which is exactly what the film was about. It's clearly somewhat autobiographical, I think some part of him knew his career was over and wanted to get this film out just in time. He was two weeks late. The themes of obscured sexual morals, patriarchy, privilege, male dominance is the core of the film, toxic masculinity. It would have actually done a lot to add to the dialog at the time around the "me too" movement, as a man who was admitting to doing these things growing and coming to terms with it, instead of silencing him. I understand why it was buried but I think that was a mistake and adds to the idea that the current culture is not an open forum. There are many ways this film could be interpreted to make him look worse or better, but we are all adults, we should be able to see it. You can find it online if you know how. It's excellent, a bit sloppy here and there, (blocking errors/script supervision, Pamela Aldon being too similar to her role in Louis takes you out of it a bit) but it's a self funded independent debut feature shot on black and white film by a stand up comedian and a television crew in 2017 and it's beautiful and heartfelt and that's a amazing. It is actually an extremely important film and should be seen no matter how you feel about the social issues surrounding it. Also comparing it to woody Allen is lazy and not at all accurate, it's much closer to 40's/50's American drama romances, Douglas Sirk, Howard hawks, George cukor, Preston sturges. Kubrick's Lolita is obviously a HUGE influence. Chloe grace moretz is basically playing a version of sue Lyons' Lolita and looks and acts much like her. There are moments in the film that are clear homages to that film.

CKs homage to Woody Allen is amusing but just not funny enough. It feels a lot like his TV show with it's slow burn, comedy of mannerisms and reactions but it lacks pace in a feature film. CK actually edited it, which sort of explains it.

Ok, the film was imperfectly and somewhat hastily delivered and does not deserve a high rating in its present form. The editing is decidedly uneven and Louie's sidekick's (I forget his name) performance entirely unnecessary, gross and completely over the top. This character actually contributes absolutely nothing to the film and detracts badly from its important message in these turbulent times.

The film's obvious weaknesses are most unfortunate, as the material itself is thought provoking, intelligently presented and actually NEEDS to be discussed this fearlessly, this openly in a time, where closed-minded prejudice and irrational fear inhibit rational thought.

Louie's fearlessness in the face of all the angry adversity should actually be admired if we dare to admit for one single moment to what extent our own sexual inclinations are forces that exist that are almost unmanageable. The scene of the girl's apparent surrender to John Malkovich is brilliantly depicted and, in a way, says it all. Yogesh

Louis trying to revive the spirit of "Golden Age" cinema with his filmmaking style gives the film a welcome uniqueness, but its appropriateness is kind of questionable. As it usually is with his work (Horace & Pete, Louie), the film gives him a platform to spew out his thoughts and views on the world and society in an entertaining manner. That being said the film lacks a clear message or point. At least it introduces some intriguing well rounded and balanced arguements, discussions on "current" societal issues (weirdly reflecting the reprehensible actions Louis made in his past). Overall, seperating the art from the person behind it, I Love You, Daddy is an original and wothwhile watch just based on its great screenplay and fantastic acting alone. I would recommend seeing it if you get the chance.