Le petit homme

In many respects savants, polymaths and autodidacts are in the same fix as slow learners, retards and idiots. They're all "special ed" cases, estranged from "normal" society by their intellectual "superiority/inferiority."

They share similar problems in classrooms; namely, the tendency to be bored, frustrated and/or disruptive. It's not easy being either too advanced or slow.

"Little Man Tate" dramatizes the plight of a "super-gifted" seven-year-old, subtly played by Adam Hann-Byrd. Little Fred Tate must cope not only with normal problems of childhood but also his extraordinary mental gifts which set him far apart from fellow children his age.

After feeling a lack of empathy from his mother (caringly portrayed by Jodie Foster) and his teacher-mentor (sensitively executed by Dianne Wiest) Fred reaches out to a college student who befriends him. Unfortunately, that relationship comes to a disappointing end when the older chum tells him that he must seek out kids his own age.

Scott Frank's script may have its peaks and valleys, yet its heart's in the right place, and he concludes his little drama on a happy (if tidy) note. Jodie Foster directs with concern and reveals genuine promise.

Little Man Tate has it's moments. Fortunately, it doesn't run into the problems of other kid-oriented movies by falling into stereotype. If it did, Fred would have glasses and acne problems like every other geek. I am happy that they found a decent child actor to carry the weight of the production (much like Empire of the Sun). There just isn't that much to say about this movie other than that it appeals only to a selective few.

I will be honest, this could have been better and deeper, but Jodie Foster didn't want it to and so she winds up being the Virgin Mary in this movie. I know that doesn't make a lot of sense here, but if you see it you'll understand. Perhaps she is becoming an egotist. Still, between Revenge of the Nerds and this, I'll take this.

Overall, not necessary viewing, but you could do worse. 3 out of 5 stars.

I had to smile at the legend before the end titles - "A Jodie Foster Film" - one movie and she's an auteur! Nevertheless, this is an accomplished well acted, "little" film looking at the gift-cum-curse of being a gifted child in a largely misunderstanding world.

To be fair, the movie looks little more than a better-than-average TV movie, but is elevated by its director's star turn in front of the cameras, plus some neat little (that word again!) directorial flourishes, like a slow cutaway into the distance of Foster's workaday waitress Dee Tate's mother/son dance with young son Fred and at other points interesting suffusions of light and animation to perhaps demonstrate the surging thought process of the precocious infant.

The narrative gets a little skewered as Fred is adopted by a wealthy philanthropist female, childless naturally, whose feelings quickly move from professorial to matrimonial and a too obvious conflict with Foster's more down-home mother love. Some of the situations are a little too pat also, for instance the way that Fred cleaves to older boys, one a maths prodigy himself, the other a piano-playing college boy (played by a young Harry Connick Junior), the lad obviously groping emotionally for a male bonding relationship with his natural father nowhere around.

Freak occurrences too like Connick's initial encounter with Fred (symbolically dropping the whole world on his shoulders!) and a side-lined Foster's rescue of a drowning child just as Fred's making an appearance at the professor's side on national TV also jar credulity a little and of course sentimentality rears its largely unwelcome head before the happy ending, but I'm perhaps being too severe on what is when all is said and done, a warm, family entertainment on an off-beat subject.

This movie is obviously what one would call "labour of love". It's a pleasure to watch. The story shows beautifully what a thousand articles on math prodigies cannot- that even geniuses need love and that no matter how "genius" that child is he is still only a kid.

She brings out the subtleties of her character. Fred seems adult-like in a child's world and yet deals with child-like simplicity in an adult's world. Jane is the headmistress of a school for the gifted, who believes that her theories on child-prodigies can bring out Fred's best talents, but forgets that Fred's best is not in his head but in his heart. Working to give her child the best yet fierce-fully protective of Fred is his mother Dede. This movie perfectly capture the heartbreaking events that can happen when a child is given too much attention but no affection. Hats off to Adam Byrd who gives a very nuanced performance. Both Jodie Foster and Nancy show the little personality clashes very well. Jodie foster has done a great job when she shows Dede's reaction and then later Jane's reaction to the fact that Fred has had a nightmare.I hope to be able to see more movies from her.

I was mainly interested in this film because of the subject - the predicament of a child genius. Half way through it I was captivated, not so much by the subject(in part because of the way it was handled), but by the child genius himself. Adam Hann-Byrd is thoroughly captivating. Rendering a sympathetic performance, he's almost bewitching! He even looks a lot like Jodie Foster. And it's to her credit as a director for finding such a perfect little actor to play such a complex role. Jodie Foster herself gives a moving performance as a struggling mother who is suddenly made to feel incapacitated, both financially and mentally, as the mother of a child prodigy. Diane Wiest's choice of characters has always been interesting. From 'Edward Scissorhands' to 'Birdcage', 'Practical magic' and still other films, she's usually played characters who are slightly quirky, odd or non-conformist, with a touch of humor in them. Over here she plays to perfection the role of the demanding, independent mentor of Fred Tate with a warped emotional intelligence.

One grouse though...as far Diane Wiest's character is concerned. I think her role is too much of an extreme as compared to Jodie Foster's. At the end of the film, Wiest's character, Jane Grierson ends up looking sheepish, repenting and even stupid to an extent. The end is almost sort of an ode to perfect motherhood, decrying the failure of the poor mentor spending tons of money by taking prodigies under her wing. It seems to say, child prodigies don't need all that specialized atmosphere, don't need special benefits, when in fact they do. I'm not saying that they ought to be living in state-of-the-art cages where they will only interact with other prodigies. But they do need a lot of other benefits that ordinary schools which underestimate the intelligence of even "normal" people just cannot provide. Child geniuses need to be dealt with very sensitively, keeping in mind their advanced faculties all the time and an atmosphere has to be created for them to properly nurture their special gifts. Somehow this film, by showing Jane Grierson as obviously insensitive, indirectly puts forth a bad case for special training for child geniuses. The real test of motherhood and Dede's feelings of jealousy towards Jane would have been explored if Jane, along with her maternal feelings for Fred would have also been shown to be sensitive or considerate. Instead we are made to laugh at Jane because she offers Fred some brown fruit/veggie juice and he asks for Coke... So that's it. This film is good, not for the content or it's resolution, but for the acting. Kudos to Adam Hann-Byrd!