There seems to be this idea that just because a film is a low budget "art house" film, it must be good. This attitude is not much different than saying that every big budget action flick must be good.
After Life is a perfect example of how an "art house" flick can fail. A good picture must have meaning AND be well put together. A film that has meaning but is poorly put together is no better than a film that is well done but has no meaning. After Life is an example of the first.
Sure After Life is based on an interesting idea - what one memory would you like to keep for all eternity - but it is very poorly put together. Scenes are long and boring, extending on for several minutes when a minute would do. After a while, scenes grow highly repetitive. The "plot" development is so ridiculously slow that the viewer could easily fall asleep for 20 minutes and miss nothing.
I'll give credit to After Life for making the viewer think, but as stated before a movie must also be well put together. The single sentence "If you could choose only one memory to keep forever, what would it be?" invokes as much thought as this movie.
**Warning minor spoilers ahead**
Furthermore, the movie is so full of clichés it is hard to believe anyone could find it inventive or insightful. For example, there is the old man who chooses a memory of sitting with his wife alone on a park bench. Sadly, this character was the main focus of the movie.
Other characters are nearly as cliched. The film professes to have some great insight on life, but ends up saying very little. To remember ones friends, it argues, is what is really important.
In conclusion, After Life is a perfect example of how an "art house" film can suck. It takes nearly 2 hours to state what could be said in a couple sentences. The film fails to draw the viewer in, as it rambles on and on. After Life might have meaning, but has very little else. Overall, one would be much better off talking with real people about their favorite memories than watching this extremely long and boring film.
Rating: 2/10
After Life is a perfect example of how an "art house" flick can fail. A good picture must have meaning AND be well put together. A film that has meaning but is poorly put together is no better than a film that is well done but has no meaning. After Life is an example of the first.
Sure After Life is based on an interesting idea - what one memory would you like to keep for all eternity - but it is very poorly put together. Scenes are long and boring, extending on for several minutes when a minute would do. After a while, scenes grow highly repetitive. The "plot" development is so ridiculously slow that the viewer could easily fall asleep for 20 minutes and miss nothing.
I'll give credit to After Life for making the viewer think, but as stated before a movie must also be well put together. The single sentence "If you could choose only one memory to keep forever, what would it be?" invokes as much thought as this movie.
**Warning minor spoilers ahead**
Furthermore, the movie is so full of clichés it is hard to believe anyone could find it inventive or insightful. For example, there is the old man who chooses a memory of sitting with his wife alone on a park bench. Sadly, this character was the main focus of the movie.
Other characters are nearly as cliched. The film professes to have some great insight on life, but ends up saying very little. To remember ones friends, it argues, is what is really important.
In conclusion, After Life is a perfect example of how an "art house" film can suck. It takes nearly 2 hours to state what could be said in a couple sentences. The film fails to draw the viewer in, as it rambles on and on. After Life might have meaning, but has very little else. Overall, one would be much better off talking with real people about their favorite memories than watching this extremely long and boring film.
Rating: 2/10