jasontheterrible As a political and social commentary this film is ridiculous. If it sounds like a retard, looks like a retard and talks like an educated individual, it is not a retard! So the premise on its face is farcical. However, as a dark comedy that the whole family can enjoy, it is spectacular. Sean Penn is so earnest, forthright, and full of wisdom in this film, that we were in hysterics because he really does look and sound like a low IQ, totally handicapped person. But he is deep, perceptive and spews the lines equaling about 110 or 120 IQ. To be cynical about it, though the ACLU has fought for the criminally and legally insane to roam the streets many times and won over and over, the truth is that nothing but disaster has resulted in being this PC.

ElMaruecan82 And that's why we loved "The Beatles" because their songs were invitation to a better world, one different from our reality. But Jessie Nelson's "I Am Sam" approach the Beatles like a real Gospel of life.This well-meaning drama is about the group's number-one fan: Sam, a Starbucks Coffee employee with the mind of a 7-year old child fighting for the custody of his daughter of the same age, needless to say that we're supposed to root for him. His lawyer played by a Michelle Pfeiffer, starts like your typical shallow, self-centered, publicity-seeking executive women who, learns in the process one thing or two about love. Love, that's the film's motto, the whole purpose of the film is to prove that one's ability to love is enough to raise a child.I'm sorry but as a parent of a four-year old little girl, it's not true. The film mixes up two elements in a way that insults intelligence: loving and raising. One is a matter of the heart, it's something of universal value that transcends the barriers, but rising is a practical thing, requiring a decent amount of both mental and physical ability. It is such a painstaking occupation you can't deal with it alone, whether you're Sam, a blind woman or even two parents. But this movie wants to make us believe that love is the one and only requirement. The premise is fallacious from the start.Critics pointed out that the film makes an effort to show a father capable of taking of her child despite his handicap. Actually, the film can't even afford to be manipulative, as it contradicts the very points it tries to make, some situations were so embarrassing that I started to question very early whether this film was serious or a joke? Starting with the birth, Lucy's mother doesn't even have a glimpse on her child and she leaves the hospital as if she had just thrown a used Kleenex on a trashcan. And Sam leaves the hospital with the baby in his arms!!!People leave a hospital with a baby in a Moses' basket or in the mother's arms if they're going to a car or a cab. That sight of Sam with little Lucy in his arms, in the middle of a subway, exposing her to all the germs of the world and with no one being ever worried about it, it could look like a kidnapping after all, killed all the film's credibility. If the point was to show a capable father, well it's a fail. Later, he can't understand why his daughter is crying and needs the help of Annie, the benevolent next-door neighbor, to tell him that she needs to eat every two hours.Didn't he know? Didn't he prepare her birth? Didn't he train from diaper-changing? Does this guy have any family? How much time did pass before Annie came? Before you ask too many questions, the film makes a convenient ellipse with the Beatles' music in the background (the musical leitmotif) Lucy grew up and turns out to be a bright little girl, played very well by Dakota Fanning. From this chronological leap, we've got to assume that nothing went wrong until she started to outsmart Sam, and refuses to learn anything to stay on his level.You can tell the writers needed to make this as pivotal as possible; he's also arrested in a weird scene involving a prostitute, which raises a social worker's attention. Loretta Devine plays the 'bad guy' part while we're supposed to feel in comfort when Sam goes buy shoes to his little girl, with his friends also suffering from mental handicap, some played by actors. Not every girl has a mother but I know shopping and buying clothes is a girl or a woman thing. I refuse to believe that Sam doesn't know any woman who could go have a woman-to-woman moment with Lucy. Seeing little girl surrounded by a bunch of grown-up adults talking weird isn't heart-warming, it is downright creepy.Or at least, that's what the directing applies, what's with all the weird camera short and hand-held filming (with some weird zooms), you can tell some parts want to make you 'aaw' well it's either embarrassing to watch or unintentionally funny. The performance of Sean Penn has been deemed as 'full retard' by "Tropic Thunder" and you can tell it's the kind of one-note approach that doesn't work in movies, especially since he's not always in the same level of smartness, he's capable of detecting hidden messages beneath the Beatles songs, but sometimes, he can't even handle a client in his Starbucks shop. His level of mental retard fluctuates according to the requirements of the plot.The whole experience of "I Am Sam" feels like someone tried to make a film in the same vein than "Philadelphia" with the subplot involving the lawyer. But even Michelle Pfeiffer can't save this and I thought she was too miscast, she's just too 'beautiful" for that face; they made an effort to make her so appealing to the camera it was distracting. As for the message, well, we're supposed to believe that Sam is capable, because of the Power of Love.I'm sorry but I agreed with the prosecutor and in the one scene where he asked Annie a valid question about Sam's capability to raise Lucy when she'll reach puberty. Annie eludes the answer and asks him if he would (as if the issue was gender) and instead of asking the question again, the prosecutor turns into a sort of villain who asks a sensitive question about Annie's personal background. She cries, she becomes the victim, and the question is left unanswered.That's the film in a nutshell, too many good sentiments preventing the good questions to find answers while they're too obvious not to be seen.

Cynthia Sarob Sean Penn does a great job here. Very convincing and touching. You also get Michelle Pfeiffer and Dakota Fanning. What can possibly go wrong there? The performance of Sean Penn is outstanding. He plays a mentally disabled father who does all he can to stay with his daughter Lucy (Dakota Fanning). This movie has funny moments but is also sad and very deep. You cannot avoid but feel with the protagonists.If somebody asks me to recommend a movie, here we go. It even comes with Beatle songs. Give it a try"!Don't miss out on that wonderful masterpiece. It is quite long but you won't regret it. I run out of adjectives to describe the film. It left me speechless. And that is quite something for a woman.

krocheav After waiting several years to see this film--all the while hoping for a thoughtful handling of its tough subject-- I was left wondering what went wrong. I have great empathy for films about challenged people coming to terms with their situations but, when a writer and director play fully on the viewers emotionalism it reduces the work to mere manipulation. If you want to see what it looks like when done better try finding "Charly" '68 ~ where Cliff Robertson deservedly won the academy award for his fine interpretation - along with a script offering more depth. While Sean Penn can be OK, he can often be painful - here, he is OK but the material is simply unbelievable.It's also hard to believe that Cinematographer Elliot Davis allowed his name to be left on the credits. There are sections where the sloppy, single hand held camera shots rival some of the worst to be seen in a 'mainstream' movie - the jerky movements and annoyingly bad use of the zoom lens made me feel so nauseous that watching to the end became a complete struggle. Judging from the blatant product placement throughout - it looks like the producers may have ended up with a comparatively small financial outlay. What could and should have been a warm, intelligent character study has been given a somewhat sentimentalized, if not patronizing, how-not-to- do-it Hollywood treatment - while also perhaps lacking a degree of genuine integrity. The end result looks like a let's try playing it to the hilt and see if any awards might just get handed out. And predictably some were - but not quite what was hoped for.Michelle Pfeiffer at times looks a little embarrassed with her lines as well as certain situations in her role as a successful high priced lawyer and, can we truly believe this woman doesn't have anyone knocking on her door? - perhaps this situation might have played more convincingly if the always reliable Laura Dern role was reversed. While young Dakota Fanning is marvelous her lines are far too mature for her cute six year old. Considering what it might have been with better handling this generally comes over as a bit of a contrivance. Those looking for a feel good show who don't necessarily want to think too much about their movies will enjoy it - others could possibly be more than a little disappointed. We've sure seen worse but this should have been better. Please don't play it again Sam...