Skip to content
Bramble

Entertainment

Critics pan 'Trust Me, I'm a Doctor', Kal Penn film on Anna Nicole Smith's physician

Two left-leaning outlets review the film 'Trust Me, I'm a Doctor', which stars Kal Penn as Sandeep Kapoor, Anna Nicole Smith's doctor, and both judge it a weak, unfocused biopic.

2 outlets · 2L · 0C · 0R First reported Account updated
Image: The Hollywood Reporter
Image: The A.V. Club

1 / 2

The story, neutrally told

Left · 2Trust Me, I'm a Doctor is a new film about Sandeep Kapoor, the doctor of model and reality TV star Anna Nicole Smith, who was charged with crimes related to his treatment of her after her 2007 death from a drug overdose at age 39. Left · 2Thane Economou wrote and directed the film, which is based on Kapoor's self-published memoir; Kal Penn plays Kapoor, Abbie Cornish plays Smith, and Linda Hamilton plays his attorney Ellyn Garofalo. Left · 2The story opens with a police raid or arrest at Kapoor's home, then flashes back through his relationship with Smith, using a discovery meeting with Garofalo as a loose framing device, and later covers the trial.

Left · 2The cast also includes David Julian Hirsh as Howard K. Stern, Elon Gold as TMZ founder Harvey Levin, and Ted Jefferies as photographer Larry Birkhead, with Penn's Kapoor narrating and breaking the fourth wall. Left · 1The Hollywood Reporter's Frank Scheck calls it a "Moldy and Misguided Bio-Dramedy" that arrives nearly two decades too late. He faults its jokey tone, its clunky exposition and its inconsistent mood, and says it feels like another sleazy attempt to capitalize on Smith's notoriety, though he praises Cornish's performance and calls Penn's turn sensitive. Left · 1The A.V. Club's Brent Simon calls it "a generally ineffective and sometimes silly bauble" with an erratic time-skipping structure and intrusive narration. He praises supporting turns, including Hirsh, Gold and Al Sapienza, says Penn and Hamilton make "the least bad choice" given the material, and blames Economou's adaptation for the film's flaws.

Left · 2Both reviews compare the film's exposition to a Wikipedia entry and single out a flashback about Frédéric Prinz von Anhalt, who claimed to be the father of Smith's child or to have had an affair with her, as an example of its lack of focus. Left · 2The A.V. Club says the film avoids taking a stance on moral complicity versus legal guilt and leaves Kapoor a character viewers "can never really know, or care about"; The Hollywood Reporter likewise says Smith is given short shrift in favour of Kapoor, "about whom it's hard to care much about". The film's release date is given as October 16, 2026.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.

Left2 outlets

Framing
Both outlets run negative reviews that treat the film as a poorly structured, exploitative or confused biopic, and fault the writer-director more than the cast.
Emphasis
Tonal inconsistency, Wikipedia-style exposition, the fourth-wall narration, and the film's failure to make Kapoor or Smith compelling; the casting and some supporting performances get credit.
Leaves out or plays down
Neither review gives much detail about the legal outcome of Kapoor's case or reports any response from the filmmakers or Kapoor.
Charged language
“Moldy and Misguided”“sleazy attempt to capitalize on Smith's notoriety”“generally ineffective and sometimes silly bauble”
For example
“Moldy and Misguided Bio-Dramedy” — The Hollywood Reporter
“Anna Nicole Smith was so fascinating to American media that it's still exploiting her memory in confused films” — The A.V. Club

Centre0 outlets

No centre outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Right0 outlets

No right outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Ask about this story

Loading…