![](https://image.chilimovie.com/public/300px/20200508/7ArmQ4I8QUs6TZjON5cmfMn9VUt.jpg)
![](https://image.chilimovie.com/public/300px/20200508/7ArmQ4I8QUs6TZjON5cmfMn9VUt.jpg)
![](https://image.chilimovie.com/public/300px/20200508/7ArmQ4I8QUs6TZjON5cmfMn9VUt.jpg)
I Am
I AM is an utterly engaging and entertaining non-fiction film that poses two practical and provocative questions: what’s wrong with our world, and what can we do to make it better? The filmmaker behind the inquiry is Tom Shadyac, one of Hollywood’s leading comedy practitioners and the creative force behind such blockbusters as “Ace Ventura,” “Liar Liar,” “The Nutty Professor,” and “Bruce Almighty.” However, in I AM, Shadyac steps in front of the camera to recount what happened to him after a cycling accident left him incapacitated, possibly for good. Though he ultimately recovered, he emerged with a new sense of purpose, determined to share his own awakening to his prior life of excess and greed, and to investigate how he as an individual, and we as a race, could improve the way we live and walk in the world.
-
- Cast:
- Noam Chomsky , John Francis , Tom Shadyac , Desmond Tutu , Howard Zinn , Mahatma Gandhi
![](https://statics.madeinlink.com/ImagesFile/movie_banners/201807091325582049.jpg)
![](https://statics.madeinlink.com/ImagesFile/movie_banners/201706131846483364.png)
Similar titles
Reviews
Nice effects though.
Must See Movie...
Just perfect...
The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.
If you are one of those few (optimistic) people who are into self-improvement, this documentary is for you. It's practical, inspiring and life-changing. Get into it-- you will not regret it.
I like the moral premise and idea that all life is connected and happiness is not directly related to money once basic needs are met, but when the filmmaker resorts to pseudoscience trickery he alienates me . Somethings can't or don't need to be proved.The filmmaker shows yogurt with meter probes "reading" his feelings.The next one that got me was the"random number generators that all stopped when there was a major catastrophe. What they are used for anyway? Why they stopped did not impress me.What does a computer care about a tsunami? Is it alive? If you want to prove something with science you have to show more data. So if you want a show that starts with a nice warm cooperative premise and ends with trickery this is a good "bait and switch" for you. PS:Happiness is living in a Malibu beach mobile home with 10 million in the bank and a career in Hollywood film directing.Does that compare to the the average struggling person in a mobile home park with no other options? Now I must stop myself.
I started to watch this film, but I turned it off after about 10 minutes. If you think I shouldn't make any comments about it because of that, then stop here.It's not that I couldn't watch it; I didn't want to watch it. Because the beginning of this film was filled with so many errors in logic, I felt. I noticed that the interviewees were setting up false dichotomies and setting things in opposition that don't have to be viewed that way. Also, the approach seemed to be socialistic, based upon the opinion that the best way to be is cooperative. This approach, as stated, allows no room for treating individuals as special (or even as individuals) if carried to the logical conclusion.Which brings me to my main objection. I had the feeling that if I voiced any dissent to the views presented based upon arguments of logic or reason, the answer would probably be "you need to escape the limitations of logic", in one form or another. This is something I am not willing to do. As a thinking animal, I function that way.A less severe criticism I have is that some terms being used by the interviewees were being used very loosely--in a fuzzy way that promotes misunderstanding, not clarity. A certain amount of this is unavoidable, but I don't prefer conversations that "live" in the fuzzy regions of our existence.I am not saying the film contains no ideas that are true or valuable. But I think I know those already.It is one thing to condemn what we might call excessive competition (my success promulgated on, and designed for, your failure), but competition in general is a valuable (and inescapable) condition.I think one can watch this film and pick up nuggets of truth, but this film seems to be couched in what I consider to be a dangerous approach to thinking and evaluating. Since I did not watch the entire film, I have not given it a score. To those who choose to watch it and who gain benefit from it, I say "Good".
Director Tom Shadyac speaks with intellectual and spiritual leaders about what is wrong with our world and how we can improve both this world and the way we live in it.I appreciate that Shadyac decided to look beyond the world of comedy and try to find a deeper truth in the world. He is an intelligent man and it is good to be able to see this side of him, because "Ace Ventura" does not necessarily suggest a man craving wisdom.I also like some of the folks he sought out. There is clearly a liberal bias with Chomsky, Hartman and Zinn being the models, but it was still good to hear from these thinkers. What would the right-wing think tank members say on what is wrong with the world? In the end, though, I give it a moderate rating because it never really gets in any depth. The question is vague, and without looking for specific answers, you cannot get the best advice. We all know the world is better if we love one another and pass on a smile, but what is the fundamental problem?