If you're looking for a terror movie like Poltergeist, Amityville or something like it, so this is the wrong movie. However, if you look for a movie about ghosts with a different point of view, the ghost's point of view, so maybe you'll like this movie.(*)(*)(*)(*) WARNING: THE TEXT BELOW CONTAINS SPOILERS !!! (*)(*)(*)(*)The movie also has a little life lesson that, perhaps, we don't realize at first glance. A girl that lives inside a loop which is one day that repeats over and over again. She is a ghost repeating her last day without knowing about it. Then one day a psychic initiates contact with her. So there's a battle in which the psychic tries to free her. She initially refuses to believe and, when she finally accepts the truth, she faces the fear to move forward. When she finally decides to move on, she finds out that she needs to face a part of herself that is dark and is stopping her from proceed.The interesting is the plot fits perfectly for living people. When we just start to live an empty and repetitive life because we afraid to get out of our comfort zone, we just become ghosts of ourselves. The only way out is to do as the character in the movie, accept the reality and face what is trapping us, for then to be able to get ahead.

If you appreciate a movie that pulls you in, all the while requiring you to think; at the same time eliciting strong feelings in you that you do not expect and might rather not feel, then this is a movie for you. Simply presented, economically fashioned, and searingly executed it is soul-freezing in its directness; subtle in the manner of a systemic disease that presents as a seemingly innocent bump while complications reveal themselves only as you begin to pay closer and closer attention. This is sophisticated psychospiritual horror. It had (has?) me wondering if I was (am?) a Ghost. It is not a quickly developing story, but the pace befits the subject and the shifting rhythm carries you along until patience definitely pays off. I would suggest a mild warning for those who have issues of a traumatic nature. This movie may be an unsuspected trigger (that is cocked and ready...and loaded).

I am not really much of a film buff and I cannot remember commenting on a film in my life, but i do enjoy reading and listening to audio-book ghost stories instead of watching films, but this is a little gem. The great thing about this 'low budget' film is that it is not padded out with over the top effects, which can be a turn off when over done. The film has a decent story backed up by a fine and believable acting performance from Anna Ishida, i really felt for her character.I will be on the lookout for more low budget films from now on and hope that i can find a few more quality films like this. Low budget does not mean low quality.8/10 and well done to those involved in making this little gem.

I hate to disparage independent films that are attempting to do something "against the grain" in contemporary horror. I appreciate that "I Am A Ghost" is attempting to be a more intelligent, dialog driven film than the usual horror drivel, but Its many flaws compel me to write something to balance out the reviews I saw which, preposterously, likened it to Kubrick, Bergman and Hitchcock, or even "Lake Mungo." Beyond some interesting applications of After Effects, there is very little style, let alone Kubrick's. The only thing that can be compared to Bergman is the furniture. There is nothing the least bit Hitchcock about any of it. All in all, it feels like the first project of some competent filmmakers with good taste but not particularly good writing skills. Worse, it suffers from some basic logic problems and apparent anachronisms that, rather than elevating it into something fantastic or dream-like, are simply distracting. When did the main character die? The fashion and interior decoration in the ghost's remembered vision of the house (which is inexplicably the same furniture that exists in the clairvoyant's future time-line...did all future residents of the house just keep the same furniture, including the carpet on which an insane woman was stabbed to death?) appears to be from the late 19th century or even earlier. And yet the character listens to radio from the 1930s and there is a reference to electro convulsive therapy which didn't happen in the States until at least the 1940s. Perhaps this can be explained with some alternate interpretation of the ending, but any clues leading to that explanation would be so obscure that even a fan of Bergman would find it baffling. Add to this a ridiculously humorous "monster" (a nude man in gray body paint with a face manipulated by computer into something the Japanese might have been bored by twenty years ago), dialog that confuses awkward formality for intelligence, and moments such as the villain, in response to the heroine's prayers, menacingly proclaiming "Your god is dead," (shades of "Hellraiser), and it begins to become clear that this is, in fact, not the "original," "artsy," "sophisticated" movie that it's being represented as in reviews. Even the plot is nothing new to anyone with passing knowledge of ghost stories. Don't get me wrong, this isn't absolute trash, but if you are an intelligent film fan looking for something sophisticated and original, wait until it's on Netflix...