People are voting emotionally.

I really don't get the hype.

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

it is the rare 'crazy' movie that actually has something to say.

I am not against God, but this was really just advertising Christianity. the acting was not good, and the Morgan Freeman rip-off... seriously? The beginning set-up the movie like it was going to be a great one, but then the plot disappeared and the point of the movie became to teach you the 10 commandments. After the girl was frozen the story became way too scattered, and WAY too many characters come in. 3 stars at best. Of there was a better cast and maybe some proofreading of the script, the movie could've been potentially OKAY maybe 5 stars. You could tell the movie was sponsored by some kind of church group. Don't waste your time on this movie. It was honestly a waste of 2 hours. I support God, but I don't support this movie.

Having seen some really awful Christian films somehow along the way, I was extremely wary to even give this one a look, but got talked into it nevertheless, and was very surprised.For once, a solid, interesting story that actually might appeal to someone outside of a church audience. As a matter of fact, it really strayed from the usual modus operandi of Christian films, which is to really push the bible rather than to just tell a story.It seemed very mature in storytelling, as the plot lines were all different, but somehow intersected and worked with each-other and in the end, though all got resolved in a somewhat typical Hollywood fashion, the story itself kept me pretty involved and I found it to be, for the most part, compelling, which I can't say for any of the other Christian films I've seen.The cinematography was done fairly well, and though the lighting did seem a little forced, the camera work was solid and the editing was cohesive and focused. The acting, for the most part, was natural, though some came off better than others.All in all, this is not going to score anyone a whole lot of mainstream buzz or come out the other side with any real awards, but I found it to be, by far, the best of this genre I've seen, and I would recommend it as a rental for sure.

An old Christian songwriter once crooned "why should the devil have all the good music?" An appropriate question for our time might be "why should the devil have all the good movies?" I'm thankful there are Christian filmmakers (many with only limited funding, backgrounds, experience in cinematography) who are taking the plunge into the film-making world. I'm confident in the future it will be the norm for films produced by Christians to be headlining right next to other films (in a similar vein of how, these days, there are numerous Christian bands getting equal billing as other bands). I'm also confident that films produced by Christians will one day match, in the least, the quality and creativity of those produced by their secular peers (something we often forget in our Christian circles is that secular filmmakers weren't always producing films with the same prowess as they are today –in fact, you might look up Steven Spielberg's first film "Firelight" for some fun viewing).Enter John Ward, someone who has had a certain amount of industry background and also some experience in producing Christian media. For those who don't know, he is one of the creators of the "Liquid" DVD study series on Thomas Nelson publishing and Navigators Press. Ward hails from the Mariner's Church in Orange County, California, where he is a High School student worker and small group leader. He (along with Todd Ziele, and Mariner's church associate pastor Jeff Pries) recently caught a vision to move beyond the Liquid DVD series and attempt to produce a feature length, faith-based film. Thus, we have the birth of "I AM" the movie."I AM" is a kind of parable about the 10 commandments being played out in modern day life (set in Los Angeles, Ca.). The approach of the film is intended to be contemplative and somewhat moody, with the goal of prompting viewers to think and discuss the subject matter. I want to say that on my first viewing of the film I was a little taken aback by one of the initial plot subjects because I perceived it to be somewhat over the top (and maybe a bit… corny). Keep in mind that I was born in Los Angeles (county), lived most of my life in California, and often stereotypes abound that are far from accurate regarding mainstream life on the west coast. However, after some dialogue with others and doing some research on my own, I discovered that the subject matter of this particular plot line is very much a cutting-edge issue right now. Certainly this is yet to be "mainstream" in any locale, but the character in the film is clearly portrayed as one of the jet-set elite as opposed to an everyday Joe or Jane. With this in mind, I commend the filmmakers for tapping into a theme which can prompt conversations about not only its ethical implications but also the various world-view ideologies surrounding it. Aside from a couple of weaker acting moments toward the beginning of the film (and my own subjective preference for the font and words of the Decalogue to be presented differently), I found the film ultimately to be thought-provoking and very much worth my time. Though one of the commandment applications (on "graven images") seemed a little vague, most of the others were not only clear but also poignant and convicting. I found the intertwining of the themes of "stealing" and "coveting" to be especially powerful. Furthermore, the voluntary restitution and making amends exampled is a timely contrast to the scratch and claw backstabbing portrayed in another recent film release ("The Social Network" – based on the alleged true story of the founders of Facebook). Some professional film critics will likely try and debunk the film along the lines of borrowing techniques and formulas, but anyone watching a fair amount of secular movies will have to concede that this is pretty standard fair in most films – and in virtually every art form (I was just thinking recently; How many times is Alfred Hitchcock's "Rear Window" theme going to be regurgitated by Hollywood?). Some Christian critics will likely be expecting an approach more along the lines of "Facing the Giants" and "Fireproof." Personally, I appreciate the film-makers breaking away from that and placing their own fingerprints on this project.In all, Ward and company have produced a solid, entertaining, life-challenging film (with a strong sound-track), and we'll be anticipating more from them in the future as a welcome addition to the Christian movie scene. They're also to be commended for the free advance promo DVDs being made available to churches.-Eric Hann

And here we have the reason why Christian filmmakers get such a bad rap. Not only is this an awful cliché driven Christian film, it is an awful film - period. I don't know where to begin, but I'll try.First, I'll point out the ridiculous gimmick of having what I believe to be Morgan Freeman's stand-in playing the I Am. Upon seeing him in the trailer, I knew the movie was going to stink. Relying on gimmicks to get people in the seats will only work on the first showing. After that, it's all word of mouth and the words are "stay away." Second, there was just too much going on. All of the characters were the same.They were uninteresting, bland, and forgettable. I often caught myself saying, "Now, who is that again?" The dialogue didn't mix things up either. Everything was on the nose. The message came before the method on this one in a big way.Third, the camera work was, at best, the type of footage you would get from a royalty free video library. Almost every scene was heavily painted with colorful lighting of reds, blues, golden hues, and stark whites. Cecil B. Demille forbid the DP actually just use natural lighting or have a reason for lighting the way he did. I can handle heavily lighted scenes, but only if they serve a purpose. The only purpose I suppose this DP had was that he had access to a larger grip truck he wasn't normally used to. Just because you have all of the tools doesn't mean you have to use them all, partner.Finally, I Am is a great example of what happens when you have someone with access to enough money to buy or rent the best equipment and thinks he can make a film. I can hear it now: forget story, it'll look awesome! I'm sorry to say, but you made moving pictures with sound, but a film it is not. As a writer, a filmmaker, and a Christian, I am insulted.