This was a good film with some major flaws. I was drawn to the film because of its purported primary subject, depicted on the cover - Sean. I read the back-story, which serves as the premise for the new film, and assumed we'd be delving into the life of this compelling character.
While there were many satisfying tidbits throughout, we aren't introduced to 'modern-day' Sean until we're more than 20 minutes into the movie. This should serve as an indication of the film's primary flaw. Bottom line: For a film entitled, "Following Sean," we're not really given much time with the title character. We're left guessing about his true thoughts about his hippie upbringing, his parents' decision to allow him to experience said hippie culture unabated at such a young age, and many of the details of his adolescent years and early adulthood. We're given only fleeting glimpses of his parents, both in 1969 and 2005.
What the film fails to acknowledge is the basis for its own appeal - we're drawn in by that little child who is obviously in need of adequate parenting. What were his parents thinking? Why would they allow him to be filmed making references to using drugs at four years old? What sort of backlash did the film's release cause for them? Did it contribute to the breakup of their marriage? Do they wish they had done things differently? I never got the sense that the filmmaker got close enough to his subjects to truly answer any of these questions. Instead, we're given updates on Arlyck's life since the original film's release - almost in slideshow form at some points. It felt, at times, like getting a family update letter that had arrived at the wrong address. You take it all in on a curious level, while all the while realizing it wasn't really meant for your eyes.
We're also not given enough of the 15 minute original short. If we had known our subject, his parents, and even the filmmaker a little better, we could have invested in the updates on a deeper level.
That said, the film is nicely shot, and contains a great soundtrack. Its strongest suit is its title character. I only wish we'd gotten to know him a little better.
While there were many satisfying tidbits throughout, we aren't introduced to 'modern-day' Sean until we're more than 20 minutes into the movie. This should serve as an indication of the film's primary flaw. Bottom line: For a film entitled, "Following Sean," we're not really given much time with the title character. We're left guessing about his true thoughts about his hippie upbringing, his parents' decision to allow him to experience said hippie culture unabated at such a young age, and many of the details of his adolescent years and early adulthood. We're given only fleeting glimpses of his parents, both in 1969 and 2005.
What the film fails to acknowledge is the basis for its own appeal - we're drawn in by that little child who is obviously in need of adequate parenting. What were his parents thinking? Why would they allow him to be filmed making references to using drugs at four years old? What sort of backlash did the film's release cause for them? Did it contribute to the breakup of their marriage? Do they wish they had done things differently? I never got the sense that the filmmaker got close enough to his subjects to truly answer any of these questions. Instead, we're given updates on Arlyck's life since the original film's release - almost in slideshow form at some points. It felt, at times, like getting a family update letter that had arrived at the wrong address. You take it all in on a curious level, while all the while realizing it wasn't really meant for your eyes.
We're also not given enough of the 15 minute original short. If we had known our subject, his parents, and even the filmmaker a little better, we could have invested in the updates on a deeper level.
That said, the film is nicely shot, and contains a great soundtrack. Its strongest suit is its title character. I only wish we'd gotten to know him a little better.