Ross Partridge’s film ‘Lamb’ is not a horror film, though anyone reading the one-star reviews it has received on could hardly be blamed for thinking it were:

wow..just horrible..the movie is trying to normalize is disturbing to see that now this is the trend..showing that a relationship between a middle aged man and a very young child is normal and perfectly natural..

It is quite shocking that we reached this point where these kind of movies now pop up, and people cant see nothing abnormal about it. Movies as a matter of fact have always been used as an efficient tool to brainwash..this movie is doing just that,,brainwashing

avoid this movie..trash that presents child abduction and pedophilia in a positive light!!“

Of course such a response won’t surprise any world-weary Kind: a film that focuses on the developing friendship between a forty-seven year-old man and a girl of eleven (‘Tommie’, played by Oona Laurence), a friendship that briefly blossoms after the two run away together to a secluded hide-out, is bound to feel like a horror movie to anyone who unquestioningly buy into the dominant narrative on child sexuality and paedophilia.


I’m no film-buff  – I probably watch no more than six or seven films in an average year – and am too squeamish to be a fan of anything that seeks to scare or disturb me, but horror films are interesting because the monsters and ghosts they depict often embody and explore the fears and anxieties of the society they emerged from.

Think how films which explore the corruption of the human body, such as The Fly and The Thing, proliferated when people first became aware of the true significance of AIDS; how cold war America produced endless horror movies whose monsters were aliens; how nowadays the zombie embodies both our fear of ageing, and – with the increase in islamic terrorism – our anxieties over how apparently normal people can suddenly transform into savage monsters intent on the death of innocents (this may be reflected in the difference between the slow, encumbered zombies of, say, George A. Romero’s 1978 Dawn of the Dead and the preternaturally fast-moving zombies in World War Z).

But is it only in horror films that we find embodied our hidden, inarticulate fears? And why only fears? If horror films are disturbing because they embody things we find hard to face in real life, could the horror expressed in the above review arise because ‘Lamb’ revealed to the reviewer hidden aspects of himself that he was not able to face or acknowledge?

The plot

Lamb is not the kind of film that is spoiled by spoilers: it is free of gratuitous plot-twists and cliff-hangers, the story is simple and follows a natural course.

Whilst this essay neither is a ‘review’ nor requires of the reader a detailed knowledge of its plot for those who have not yet seen the film the following paragraph provides a thumbnail outline of the plot – please treat it as optional reading:

The film starts off in a grim urban environment. David Lamb, a 47 year-old divorcee whose father has just died, meets a sensitive little girl, Tommie, who is neglected by her parents and whose friends treat her with disrespect. He pretends to abduct her, ostensibly in order to give her so-called friends a fright, but immediately drops her off near her home. Over a period of a few days they become friends. Tommie seems to be attracted to Lamb. Together, and without telling anyone, they escape on a ‘holiday’ to a log cabin set in the kind of beautiful wilderness which Tommie has long dreamed of. Lamb shows that he can be selfish and manipulative, but we’re never quite clear what it is he wants, and the manipulation is not clear-cut. Their relationship is tested in various ways (including Lamb’s girlfriend making an unexpected visit and discovering Tommie) and grows stronger. They find a happiness and companionship in each other which has been lacking in their lives. The ‘holiday’ ends and they drive back to the girl’s home so that he can drop her off a few streets away. They have an intensely emotional parting; neither wants the relationship to end, but Lamb knows that it can not continue and drives away, presumably out of Tommie’s life for ever.

Whilst, of course, I disagree with the tenor of the above review, there is a truth hidden behind the indignation and bluster when ‘petervoicu’ writes:

…we reached this point where these kind of movies now pop up, and people cant see nothing abnormal about it

[…] trash that presents child abduction and pedophilia in a positive light!!”

There does seem to be a lot of films in which an adult and a child share an intense relationship that would, in real life, be considered as abnormal by ‘normal’ people, films which make the viewer to view the relationship ‘in a positive light’ and root for its success and continuance.

An Invisible Genre?

Here is a list of films I remember having watched which answer the criteria outlined in the previous paragraph:

Dreamchild; Mary and Max; Leon; Lawn Dogs; About a Boy; The Last Butterfly; A Perfect World; Wreck-It Ralph; Up; Les Dimanches de la Ville D’avray; Pretty Baby; Paper Moon; Alice in the Cities; 3 Men and a Little Lady; Indiana Jones and The Temple Of Doom; Tiger Bay; Curly Sue; Big Daddy; Cinema Paradiso; City of Lost Children; La Drôlesse; Zazie Dans le Metro; A.I. Artificial Intelligence; El Nido; What Maisie Knew; Munted; The Sixth Sense; The Road; Aliens; Bicycle Thieves; Finding Neverland; The Innocents; The Jungle Book; The Time-Traveller’s Wife; The Man Without a Face; Shane; A High Wind in Jamaica; Il Ladro Di Bambini (the Stolen Children).

Though this list is personal and spectacularly incomplete (and I invite readers to add those films I’ve omitted) it nevertheless can be use to reveal some of the parameters and boundaries of this ‘genre’:

The relationships are between men and children, maybe most commonly girls (though this impression may just be down to my preference for films featuring little girls). There are some women protagonists, such as Ripley in Aliens and the governess in The Innocents.

The adult is troubled, damaged or, in some way, inadequate. This allows the viewer to identify and sympathise with the adult without having to approve of the adult’s motives and actions.

The child is neglected, an orphan or at risk. This allows for the absence of ‘legitimate’ adults (e.g. parents) whose presence would over-complicate the development of the relationship by competing for the child’s affection. It also establishes a justification for why the child might be drawn to such a relationship.

The relationship happens in circumstances which isolate the couple from their families, community or society (a road trip in ‘Alice in the Cities‘, an attic in ‘La Drôlesse‘). This again (see above) eliminates many problematic impediments to the relationship that would arise were it to be set in an everyday context. It also allows the film to depict a positive and consensual relationship – something that could be very controversial to do were ‘legitimate’ adults also present.

The relationship (though not necessarily criminal or paedophilic) is not one that would be approved of by the protagonists’ community or society.

The relationship often has sexual or sensual aspects (Leon, Pretty Baby…).

The adult eventually dies (Perfect World) or permanently disappears from the child’s life (Shane). There can be no Happy-Ever-After endings to a story of transgressive child-adult love, at least there can be none that would be acceptable within the dominant narrative. Killing off the adult is the most obvious way of giving a neat ending to the relationship. It also has the advantage of symbolically punishing the adult for something which, for all the film’s sympathetic view-point, ultimately Society can not tolerate. Even the loneliness that David Lamb drives off to, or Shane walks into, at the ends of their respective films could be interpreted as a form of death, a penance for the sin of having loved a child too much.

The relationship is tested by interference from the world beyond it – which is presented as uncomprehending, suspicious, interfering or villainous. One often gets the feeling in these films that it is a case of ‘the child-adult couple against the world’.

The relationship evokes the viewers’ sympathy and support: despite its transgressive nature we wish it to succeed. We experience this especially at moments when the world beyond the relationship interferes with the relationship and puts it at risk.

These are not defining characteristics – these films do not have to have all these characteristics. Some of the most interesting films are the ones which conform least to this list: in Gavin Millar’s Dreamchild – a time-shifting account of Charles Lutwidge Dodgson’s love for Alice Liddell – Dodgson neither dies nor disappears in the end, Alice is not neglected or at risk, and the relationship does not develop in an isolated context (though a deeper reading than I have space for here could show that it conforms to these characteristics in a more roundabout manner).

But I think what is most significant is how such films seduce ordinary ‘right-thinking’ people (i.e. dispositional paedophobes) into rooting for and sympathising with relationships which they would judge with odium were they to occur in the real life or if they were to read about them in the press.

Of course one explanation of this could be that a media report of, say, a man and child running away together, when compared to a film, will be so summary and so constructed out of prejudice that nothing of the true emotional nature of the relationship will be communicated, only a series of clichés hammered through the template of the dominant narrative. So it’s not surprising that someone who might cheer and root for Léon and Mathilda’s relationship whilst watching Luc Besson’s Léon: The Professional will, over breakfast the next morning, wish painful and prolonged torture on all the ‘paedos’ he reads about in his newspaper.

Which brings me tangentially to the question of what is the target demographic for a film like Lamb.


It would be fascinating to get access to some qualitative statistics on the audience for Lamb. However I’ve searched the internet for something, anything, and drawn a blank (if anyone has any idea whether such statistics exist and how they can be found I’d be very grateful if they could let me know).

However, in lieu of statistics, I think that it might be possible to draw some insights from the film itself, and from the assumption that those characters that are most richly drawn in a film will tend to correspond to the film’s core demographic.

I think we can straight away discount children or young adolescents as being part of the target demographic since the film has an ‘r’ rating.

I also suspect that women are not its target audience as there are no well-developed or interesting adult female characters in the film. I also suspect that most women would find David Lamb too ‘creepy‘ to carry them through the film.

Nevertheless David Lamb is the most complexly drawn character in the film, and despite the manipulative and dishonest way he acts towards Tommie I suspect that those most likely to empathise with his actions are adult males, particularly those entering middle age and who have experienced loneliness, childlessness or the empty-nest syndrome as their own children leave home.

And, of course, I mustn’t forget another demographic this film has undoubtedly been successful with: paedophiles.

But Lamb is not an erotic film – there is no hint at any sexual interaction between the protagonists. Could it be that those aspects of this film that have attracted the paedophile demographic also appeal to the ‘normal’ middle-aged man demographic?

Cultural Nostalgia?

If horror films like The Thing and The Fly embody a society’s anxiety about AIDS can we also ask of a film like Lamb what hidden social anxieties, fears, desires or hopes it embodies?

I think we can. And a clue might be in the emotions they provoke. The sight of Jeff Goldblum slowly transmogrifying into a giant man-fly fills us with the same horror and disgust as would the prospect of our own body being taken over with a disease like AIDS.

What do we feel about the relationships we see in Léon, Lamb, Lawn Dogs, Les Dimanches De la Ville D’avray or El Nido (to only cite films beginning with ‘L’)?

I’d venture (though admittedly as a paedophile my judgment may be biased) that it isn’t sexual desire, but rather a yearning for a kind of relationship that is denied us, that is considered deviant and illegitimate.

“I get that these two characters are lost/lonely and the girl is both abused & starving for affection and you can argue all day that this is a beautiful movie about friendship, but this movie is completely & utterly socially irresponsible!!! I believe this movie is an attempt to  […]make the audience think that this […] situation could be appropriate if it was handled as delicately. NO. See it for what it is. It is a grown man trying to make friends with a child, not a girlfriends daughter, not a niece, a separate child. Deplorable.(my underlining)

So, poisoncupcake74 by your admission the girl is ‘lost‘, ‘lonely‘, ‘abused & starving for affection‘. But because the person who is willing to step into this girl’s life and remedy these ills is a ‘stranger’ and not a step-father or an uncle it is better that she remain doomed than that she be saved by someone who does not fit into society’s idea of an approved adult.

It seems that an adult and a child ‘trying to make friends’ is viewed with the same opprobrium as an adult and a child wanting to share sensual intimacy! Friendships between non-familial adults and children become more and more stigmatised and problematic in real life.

I suspect the increased depiction of these kinds of relationships in film (and indeed, arguably, in other forms of art) points to a cultural yearning for what we’ve lost – something that we can now only legitimately experience vicariously through fiction.

And that’s why millions can enjoy these films and find them emotionally powerful and true, and can root for the central relationships without having to be paedophiles, repressed or otherwise.

I’m no anthropologist but I understand that Homo sapiens evolved in small communities that were socially promiscuous and minimally stratified by age – children would learn skills, knowledge and culture from their interactions with adults and, though children probably played mostly with other children, there would be rich interactions between generations – which would inevitably lead to friendships, which, in their turn would be beneficial to the social integration of the child into the culture of the tribe.

Is it possible that the need for child-adult friendships is somehow deeply ingrained in us? What happens when we are denied this? Is it surprising that we might turn to fiction as a salve for the emptiness created in our lives by the absence of such essential relationships?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

13 thoughts on “After ‘Lamb’: Thoughts on Film and Culture

  1. Very well said and well analyzed, Leon. You are a fantastic social scientist, bar none. These types of analyses, especially with this level of thoughtfulness, are too rare today yet greatly needed.

    I find the type of knee-jerk reaction you get from commentators like petervoicu (I will also refuse to call him a “reviewer,” since his post was all unbridled emotion and no substance) to be educational for one reason only: it displays how heavily society is conditioned to just negatively react to films depicting intergenerational friendships without putting any thought into the nuances and level of quality they viewed onscreen. There is just anger and assumptions over the interaction, without even an attempt at an incisive analyses.

    They also decry the film as an “excuse” for “normalizing” what they consider “pedophilia,” which to petervoicu is interpreted as such even in the absence of erotic or sensual elements in the film, at least on the part of the adult member of the onscreen duo. It seems this is based on an overriding fear in society, not simply of pedophilia and hebephilia, but the contention that intergenerational romantic liaisons may be on the “verge” of being normalized. It’s as if they sense a certain direction society may be headed, and it represents a form of change that the public has been strongly conditioned to fear and stand in “noble” opposition to in a completely knee-jerk manner without giving the subject any type of analysis or objective consideration. As you noted, this strong reaction may indeed be a response to what may actually be a deep-seated yearning beneath the conscious level of our collective zeitgeist. All forms of art and expression, including the celluloid medium, have always been transgressive in this manner, presenting us with imagery and ideas – even if in a subtle or veiled fashion – that force us to briefly think outside the box. This pushes too many people out of their societally-imposed comfort zone, with the reaction for many being an extreme revolt against the offending considerations put into their mind. This may be akin to how we would have expected a die hard Catholic to react to a story presenting a more nuanced view of Protestantism and religious solidarity during the height of the Reformation era.

    For poisoncupcake74, she simply but firmly laments over how an adult befriending a girl who isn’t related to him is wrong “just because.” It’s simply not what is permitted in our highly age-segregated society, and this shows how powerful our ingrained impulse to defend against any transgressions of this quasi-sacred segregation happens to be, even if it only occurs within a fictional context. It seems one of the bogeyman sub-archetypes that branched off from the standard Media Pedophile archetype of the present is the Unauthorized Adult. They are among the enemies of the Adult Savior mentality, especially when no personification of the latter archetype is present in these films to help “reunite” the Transgressive Child with her (or his) proper Authorized Adults. This may be akin to a film showing Lex Luthor laying waste to the city of Metropolis sans any appearances by Superman to “right” these wrongs.

    In fact, the Transgressive Child or Rebel Child, which Tommie represents in the film Lamb, may be yet another sub-archetype of the Innocent Child, with the titular Lamb representing the Unauthorized Adult who disrupts the sacrosanct separation of the age groups by uniting with a Transgressive Child who is willing to be led “astray” by her circumstances. The belief put forth here by poisoncupcake74 seems to be that only a “lonely” and “vulnerable” child has any “need” for an Unauthorized Adult in their lives, this being perceived as a need that only an Authorized Adult or fellow child in the same general age group has any intrinsic right to fulfill properly. This may be akin to a film about a lonely white woman who finds happiness in the arms of a black man, as it would have been viewed by a Southern U.S. audience in the early decades of the 20th century. The hypothetical black man in that story would be perceived as “taking advantage” of an innocent white woman’s need for affection that only a white man would be seen as having the “proper”, inherent right to fulfill. They would also perceive any onscreen depiction of the two kissing or displaying physical affection as “disgusting” examples of some rabble rousing filmmakers trying to “normalize” miscegenation.

    Yes, I’m sure poisoncupcake74 would insist that my analogy is absurd, and would declare that interracial and intergenerational liaisons have no parallel, but I would respond this way: “That is easy to say coming from a modern societal vantage point, but I would pay to see you try to convince people from an early 20th century Southern vantage point that they were wrong.”


    1. Thanks for that Dissy –

      Yes, I think what most shocked me with those ‘comments’ (I agree that to call them ‘reviews’ – as I do — is to accord to them a status they do not merit) is exactly what you say – I can understand how people can bridle at aspects of the film that might strike them as ‘paedophilic’ – after all that is how the ordinary person’s mind is constructed and it would be optimistic to expect any other response.

      But to be offended by child-adult friendship as poisoncupcake74 is!? Is this a ratcheting up of paedophobia? When I was a student I was lucky to form some very strong and long lasting friendships with children – would that be possible today? Do families with children still take in male students as lodgers? or is it now seen as too risky to allow a strange man to exist round your children? would such a student being friendly with the children now be seen as supicious behaviour today? rather than as an enrichment and opening up of the children’s lives – as it was back when I was a student?

      I think one consolation though is that I deliberately went for the critical reviews of ‘Lamb’ (because the horror these commenters expressed allowed me to link to the sociology of Horror films to the meaning of child-adult relationships)- however there a plenty of positive reviews of Lamb on imdb too.

      >”It seems one of the bogeyman sub-archetypes that branched off from the standard Media Pedophile archetype of the present is the Unauthorized Adult.”

      I like the idea of the ‘unauthorized adult’ and its counterpart: the ‘transgressive child’. However I think many of the films in question play with the possibility that the unauthorized adult is also the ‘Adult Saviour’ – however they are saviours who are not permitted to ‘save’ the child because their way of saving the child disrupts the legitimate methods for doing so (family, kinship, police, authority).

      >”This may be akin to a film about a lonely white woman who finds happiness in the arms of a black man, as it would have been viewed by a Southern U.S. audience in the early decades of the 20th century.”



      1. But to be offended by child-adult friendship as poisoncupcake74 is!? Is this a ratcheting up of paedophobia? When I was a student I was lucky to form some very strong and long lasting friendships with children – would that be possible today? Do families with children still take in male students as lodgers? or is it now seen as too risky to allow a strange man to exist round your children? would such a student being friendly with the children now be seen as supicious behaviour today? rather than as an enrichment and opening up of the children’s lives – as it was back when I was a student?

        Yes. No. No. Yes. Yes. And yes.


  2. Thankyou for that, I remember getting quite emotional watching that, Also because I had a Polish girlfriend and understood some of the Polish in the film. I watched that film not long after we parted company.
    Another film not mentioned on here, since he gave the invite is ‘Alleluai’ 2014 a Belgian horror film, about a couple that befriend people, Only to steal and murder them; But his female partner in crime becomes jealous when the main protagonist befriends their victims 12yo daughter — Its not about man-girl love — But like many films mentioned here, Its significant to us, and brave of the film makers in this aberrant society.


    1. >”Another film not mentioned on here, since he gave the invite is ‘Alleluai’ 2014 a Belgian horror film,”

      One for the less lily-livered of us. I might watch it from behind a cushion or the sofa – it looks very violent.


      1. I’m sure you’ll love it, If you don’t get much adrenaline in life. When the biggest threat to kids in the west is someone seeing their naked bodies, You know we’ve been pampered for to long. Most places in the third world have more important issues — Putting food on the table! As pointed out very well on Tom’s latest blog. Just watched a documentary about The Somme, and how the Welsh division was accused of being cowards, Despite advancing towards a heavily guarded wooded area — Only to mowed down by the thousands — Many were in their teens. We can argue whether it was all worth it looking at Europe today, But I’ll finish with a quote from ‘Fight Club’ (good film, you must see if you haven’t)…For us their is no great war, We are just consumers, Or something along those lines.


  3. As usual, I agree with much of what LSM says, but there is one point I’d take issue with.

    >The relationship often has sexual or sensual aspects (Leon, Pretty Baby…).

    Seems to me child-adult relationships with either open sexuality or guarded sensuality have always been rare in the movies – vanishingly so these days. Even a while back, when Leon came out in 1994, the hit-man was the “perfect gentleman”, gently discouraging the underage girl’s attempt to flirt with him. So he was somehow presented as a lovely guy and also a hired murderer – a contradiction that tells us all we need to know about the WEIRD world’s loss of its moral compass, especially as regards U.S./Hollywood. As for Pretty Baby, the story of a child prostitute could hardly fail to have sensual aspects, but my memory of this 1978 film is the auctioning off of the girl’s virginity, which had all the erotic appeal of a cattle market.

    If films are made to appeal to a wide audience, as Leon and A Perfect World surely were, the erotic aspect must be either invisible, as in A Perfect World, or else overtly repudiated, as in Leon.

    James Kincaid got it right. As I mentioned last time, in relation to advertising, he knew it is important in popular culture, including the movies, to keep the erotic element at a subliminal level, at least for the mass audience: the sexy side has to be below the threshold of consciousness, so they can enjoy the attractiveness of the child in a guilt-free way.

    So what we are often shown, I suggest, is at the conscious level merely sensuous rather than sensual. Thus we might be treated to the languorous lingering of the camera on a child as she “sensuously” savours the velvet touch of a flower and the buzzing of a bee on a hot summer’s day. But subconsciously the context may be sensual. Just as a deserted old mansion with creaky doors on a stormy night in cinema tells us to be afraid, so a film’s sensuous imagery hints – but subtly, without frightening the horses – at earthier possibilities. And the sensuous aspect gives the film maker a bit of artistic licence in terms of exposed limbs and underwear, or even (once upon a time) nudity. Definitely sensuous but not sensual.

    The threshold may be approached but not passed. Cross the line into consciousness and the audience are suddenly forced to think of themselves as possible perverts – worse still, they will steer clear of the film in case anyone else might think they are watching for the “wrong” reasons.


    1. I’ve been thinking about your comment all morning (whilst exploring one of the more peculiar graveyards in the region I live), and I think that defining the nature of the child-adult relationships in such films is much more complex than equivalent adult-adult relationships – and, yes, ‘sexual’ and ‘sensual’ are undoubtedly crude hammers with which to smash this nut.

      Some thoughts: children are just more physical in the way they interact with trusted adults – take the way Lincoln and Maisie interact in ‘What Maisie Knew’ – if Maisie were an 18 year old woman engaging with Lincoln in the same physical gestures as does 6 year old Maisie one would definitely interpret her actions as sensual or sexual:

      Now, I wouldn’t want anyone to extend my argument here – I’m not saying that because a child shares a drink with you or grabs you playfully round the leg that she is at all signaling the same intentions that an adult woman is likely to be doing, were she to do the same acts (one of the perennial accusations leveled at paedophiles is that we attribute to children’s affectionate and playful actions the same motives as if they were being performed by an adult – how true this is, and the extent to which children and adults share the same affective language is another question…), but such behaviour does signal something- and that could be anything from ‘trust’ to ‘desire’.

      Another point on the spectrum which I maybe should have added to ‘sensual’ and ‘sexual’ was ‘Romantic’ – again, I daren’t propose a workable definition of this, but there is a kind of ‘one knows it when one sees it’ factor… or maybe I could risk a definition? – a bond between two people which involves some element of physical attraction (but not necessarily ‘sexual’) which is either exclusive, or seeks to be exclusive. By that definition I think a lot of the relationships in the above film would qualify as ‘romantic’.

      clearly the relationship in ‘Pretty Baby’ isn’t exclusive since Violet is a prostitute – but, in a sense, the film emerges from the tension between her status as a child prostitute and the nature of her attachment to Bellocq.

      >”So what we are often shown, I suggest, is at the conscious level merely sensuous rather than sensual.”

      You’re right – I think ‘sensuous’ would have been a better word to use than ‘sensual’.


  4. For HOT lil Hayley BIG Fan Salem21 – among millions more HOT Hayley-ophiles. (Blonde hair, BIG blue eyes, snub-nose, rosebud lips… ya’ll know the rest.)

    (UK-Yuk PC/PureCoward’s keyword) ‘Appropriately’ on the set of ‘The Family Way’ in Swingin ’65 (co-starring with her famed Dad John), Hayley, 19, dated BIG Brit film co-Prod/Dir Roy Boulting, 52. They wed in SeXy 71 and divorced in SeXy 78. Though heated Roy had admired HOT lil Hayley for years since her 1st acting role at age 11 as a streetwize TomBoy, with her famed Dad as a fair-Cop in still HOT Brit flick ‘Tiger Bay’, Rockin ’58.

    On SeXY 70s ‘Live’ TV, HOT Haley was once asked about over-keen male fans? “Not too much problem.” SeXcept for one over-HEATED PedFan who spied on her in the Mills’ family secluded home garden shrubbery when she was 12, paraphrased, “He didn’t really scare me, he just stared. So I calmly called Daddy who called the Police and they took him away poor fellow.” (The PedFan not Dad that is??)

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I remember my mother telling my neighbour that I ‘liked’ Hayley Mills’ I’m sure they figured it was not just her acting that I admired her for. I would’ve been around twenty then, In the late nineties; And that was mentioned in the company of my father, It was no big deal — Maybe he liked her too.
    But today, that would be a risk to far for obvious reasons:

    Liked by 1 person

  6. “But is it only in horror films that we find embodied our hidden, inarticulate fears? And why only fears? If horror films are disturbing because they embody things we find hard to face in real life, could the horror expressed in the above review arise because ‘Lamb’ revealed to the reviewer hidden aspects of himself that he was not able to face or acknowledge?”

    I would not even deign to apply the relatively respectable term “reviewer” to that evidently discriminatory fuckwit petervoicu. I mean this is precisely the sort of guy that should have been strangled immediately upon leaving the womb.

    How dare he say that a given genre of subject matter should never be put to film; how dare he tell everyone not to watch it and thereby imply that film content is knowledge that we must not have. Paedophobia has indeed become the new religion it seems, and God help anyone who questions its validity. Kind of reminds me of the moral outrage expressed by the heads of Church of England following the release of the film The Life of Brian. Why indeed are they so keen to hide the facts that have the potential to subvert and destroy their beliefs?


  7. Proven by decades of modern laughing kids lusting over ‘Family’ media near nude Pinups/ADULTS & lewd rude Popstars/ADULTS.

    There is no cure for human ADULTOPHILIA!

    Natural ADULTOPHILE kids, the corrupt mainstream can scare ’em – but never stop ’em!!

    Liked by 1 person

........................... PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT........................... comments from the outraged will be approved only if they are polite and address issues raised in the accompanying article or discussion. The 'email' field can be left blank.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s