Little Man raises some very difficult ethical and philosophical issues. Some are as maddening as they are heart-wrenching. After watching this film, I was left feeling disturbed on many levels.

As a possible poster-child for any number of conflicting viewpoints on life, poor Nicolas ends up wearing many hats, none of which fits comfortably. He can surely be seen as a living example for the right-to-life movement, yet it’s hard to imagine that movement’s main constituency--the conservative religious right--ever supporting a film or a family that features life-partner lesbian moms.

Perhaps he is then the poster child for a woman’s right to choose--in this case, to choose “life.” Yet should he exist just to satisfy an arguably selfish use of that “right” to make him exist?

The life of Nicolas--a boy who, if left to Mother Nature, would never have survived--raises a bigger question. Humans in the more wealthy, scientifically advanced societies increasingly manage to keep fetuses alive via Brave New World/Frankenstein-like medical procedures. As this documentary illustrates, if you throw enough money and technology at even the most extreme case of premature birth, you can at least keep them alive.

But witnessing the outcome begs the question of whether we should keep them alive. The premature population has exploded from 8% of births in 2000 to 13% in 2004. Most do not survive and any normal quality of life for those that do is often compromised.

Perhaps to balance the heaviness, Little Man does include light-hearted, slice-of-life moments that provide some comic relief. There’s a scene in little man in which Nicole’s partner Gwen, sitting outdoors near what appears to be the family’s not-too-shabby built-in swimming pool, complains how Nicolas’s constant need for attention keeps them all from being able to go to the beach.

An alienated Gwen complains a lot about infirm Nicolas’s effect on her life and her family. I wondered why neither she, nor anyone in the film, ever also complained about the effects of the intrusive “documentary” camera. The incessant filming over a period of several years must have also seriously impeded on their “family” time, but Nicole and Gwen are very forthcoming, candid, and at ease before the camera.

Viewers may at times be reminded of Steve Martin’s L.A. Story. Both films are shot in L.A., and both are about the daily lives of upper-class players in the Los Angeles film community.

It’s hard to criticize Little Man without appearing callous to its sensitive, sacrosanct maternal and right-to-life content. But in contrast to the intensely serious, emotive nature of a film featuring a subject like Nicolas, there is a certain Osbournes feel to this documentary, something scripted about it.

In such “reality” type offerings, viewers are led to believe they are seeing the whole story of real lives, when, in fact, they are fed carefully prepared material. But Little Man is clearly told the way Conn wants it to be, and we can only know what she shows us. I found myself wanting to hear opinions from others involved in Nicolas’s life--hospital staff, home caregivers, the surrogate mother, etc.--interviewed independently of this film.

In the end, though, my thoughts keep returning to little man Nicolas and to the many other survivors of premature birth, who face an uncertain future full of risk and health problems. If that was Conn's ultimate goal, she succeeded.

Little Man was recently awarded the HBO Audience Award at the 2005 Miami Gay and Lesbian Film Festival, Best Documentary at Newfest 2005, and Best Documentary at Outfest 2005. Go to LittleMantheMovie.com for more information.

Page 1 / 2 - Home