Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

This film tells the story of a script writer, whose seems to hot the wall with the women around him.The story is actually quite good. It is interesting to see how inept he is at saying no to his daughter, and also very interesting to see the way John Malkovich's character give him the cold shoulder. There is a tinge of Woody Allen style of sarcasm and neuroticism. I liked the film.

Louis CK's take on social issues the last few years have been a welcome devils advocate to the tidal wave of leftist social marxism and this movie explores that in a refreshing fashion. Humor and comics are the great equalizers in our culture and Louis has risen to fame blending comedy and social commentary perfectlyThe cast in this film is great. Adeline, Falco, Day and especially Malkovich nail their roles and are a great mix of characters and just " works " Definitely a Fellini and Woody Allen tribute with the aesthetic, setting and quirks. The theme of paternal authority and sex create friction throughout his personal life and his daughters life and it really picks up around the half hour mark. Louis's agitated and confused mood works great in his show but became fatiguing at times.One thing I'm noticing is that the editing is taking a huge hit. Its still definitely watchable just not polished to the level of what it could have been. Still some hilarious moments and cuts and an enjoyable two hours. I had an indifferent approach starting this movie and ended up charmed. Ultimately I have seen Louis CK throughout the early 2000's as gaining success from his honesty about the fallacies and shortcomings of being a human being and making light of it through his comedies and honesty. If you enjoyed him before, you will definitely enjoy what he has to say about 2017 through the lens of this movie.

Louis trying to revive the spirit of "Golden Age" cinema with his filmmaking style gives the film a welcome uniqueness, but its appropriateness is kind of questionable. As it usually is with his work (Horace & Pete, Louie), the film gives him a platform to spew out his thoughts and views on the world and society in an entertaining manner. That being said the film lacks a clear message or point. At least it introduces some intriguing well rounded and balanced arguements, discussions on "current" societal issues (weirdly reflecting the reprehensible actions Louis made in his past). Overall, seperating the art from the person behind it, I Love You, Daddy is an original and wothwhile watch just based on its great screenplay and fantastic acting alone. I would recommend seeing it if you get the chance.

The timing of this movie could not have been more uncomfortable awkward or career destroyingly, and willfully on point. I'm guessing it may well not be the latter, which makes it even worse. The whole thing makes your head spin with contradictions which are mostlikely not. Why would anyone in their right mind choose to make a movie on this topic, at this time, with his history? Why? Why? C.K has in the past been an insightful and honest comedian, on the cutting edge of social issues and pushing comedy boundaries, so why did he get it so wrong this time? Did he do it on purpose to make a point? Is this all intentional? Are allegations against him fabricated to promote a point (there's a big component of masturbation in front of people in the movie) and cause controversy? Is he taking parody of the messed up way Hollywood acts to an extreme to make a point. Would he do that? Are we witnessing dangerous cinema? Is this some Kaufman level elaborate plan? I guess the real cruncher here is that the movie fails purely on movie terms, it's a surprisingly badly made movie with mostly unfunny script, weirdly bad performances, C.K walking in a performance as himself, the stylistic choices of black and white photography and cheesy 40s orchestral score fall flat and worse seem contrived and pointless. This massive failure has got to be costing someone a lot of money. I is so confusing, conflicting, and uncomfortable, (if it is a clever movie what exactly is its point, what was C.K trying to say with it, since his past efforts have all tried to say something) or worse it is exactly what it looks like, a blind, self-unaware, stupid, oblivious piece of bad cinema that wastes a lot of resources and talent on the most awkwardly badly timed piece of cinema since Jerry Lewis made 'The Day the Clown Cried' and didn't release it. Based purely on the bad watch this movie is (removed from the controversy and bad timing if you could possibly do that) this film should have followed Lewis's path and stayed in a dusty cupboard.