Afterwards

Trailer—Afterwards

source: Afterwards

First of all I'm no movie critic or someone pretending to be expert in the cinematic art I'm just a regular Joe who likes a good movie, with that being said I have to admit that this is one of my all time favorite movies. I like pretty much everything in it: •I find the plot to be quite unique and fascinating. It kept me in nescience until the very end (and this is something I experience rarely those days) •The acting is at its best imo, Evangeline Lilly and John Malkovich are mesmerizing… don't get me wrong Romain Duris was great too, maybe an idea lesser :) •Atmosphere is just breathtaking - mysterious, kind of noar and very, very… real. •Soundtrack is nothing short of perfect, I have nothing else to say just WOW. Overall this is one of the few films that makes me shed a tear every time I watch it (me & my girlfriend if I have to be honest) and I do recommend it with all of my heart. P.S. Sorry for my poor English :(

Agree with other reviewers on the lead character casting... another actor would have made the film amazing... the way it is...I watched it on Prime video, would've been annoyed if I had payed for the cinema.

Nathan Del Amico (Romain Duris) is a hard-driving successful New York corporate lawyer. He is approached by mysterious doctor Joseph Kay (John Malkovich) who claims to see people about to die with a bright white light. He warns Nathan to put his life in order. He dates waitress Anna (Pascale Bussières). There are constant flashbacks of Nathan with his wife Claire (Evangeline Lilly) and their two kids. These are New York characters but half of them have french accents. I don't care about Nathan. He's cold, angry, and unappealing. He's a horrible lead. As for the story, it has no dramatic movements at all and it's not compelling. Dr. Kay is not much better. Malkovich decides to play the character reserved. There is no tension. There is a supernatural aspect but it doesn't do enough with it. This thing moves slowly.

From the reviews I gathered that the 2008 Afterwards is an adaptation of the novel in French, Et Apres. This explains the theme of us not knowing the hour of our own deaths, and even more importantly, not knowing before then, which of the people we know well and who are well, will die and how. But the interest of the story doesn't explain why the director handled the theme the way he did. What are the images of the Quebec countryside, summer and winter, in direct contrast with? After all, Claire is a photographer of nature who is insisting on photographing in the snow at night a plant that only blooms one day a year. She thinks husband Nathan is a creep for being a natural at his job as a New York City lawyer. Cinematographer Pin Bing Lee and film editor Valerie Deseine have filled a large number of earlier frames with office building windows. All this is woven together by the music of Alexandre Desplat. Surely an intention was for all of us to see a bright white light surrounding each of us, in preparation for not knowing when the next NYC 9-11 will be and how.

Thus this movie is very similar to « Les Revenants » : excellent french cast but terrible story and awful pace ! The story is also reminiscent of the X-files episode 6.10 « Titonus », which proves once more time that this show was just extraordinary releasing one movie each week ! Here, the ability is salvaged by a complicated and unbelievable plot! As a french movie, the movie is deadly slow with long, meaningless scenes. As it happens in America, it gets also all the defects of this cinema: mobile conversations, colorization, wealthy characters!! Malkovich is a bad choice because his strange attitude just doesn't fit with being a doctor! The only positive thing here is Romain! He has kept his sensibility and inner fire so he is as great as usual!

this is a well produced movie, with an interesting story. it is developing quite slowly and i like the somewhat 'open' ending. essentially, a movie of appreciation of life, love, forgiveness and letting go. mr.malkovich plays a good part, making up for the somewhat pale performance of the lead actor. this is probably the weakest point of this production - the lack of an outstanding lead. apart from that - great production, i especially liked the smooth camera work. it really needs very little to be a big movie, and while i cannot say i was thrilled watching it, i did watch with interest. i understand the book, that the movie is based on is quiet good, hopefully it has more depth and makes for more significant lead personage

As the story begins, we are taken to an ideal bucolic setting that ends in what might be a lake. A boy and a girl are playing in a dock. The little girl steps on a loose board and gets trapped. She begins screaming while the boy goes running to get help. As the boy goes to cross the highway, he is struck by an oncoming car. This scene holds the key to perhaps understanding the mystery posed by the creators of this complex film. Without explanation we are taken to a Manhattan plush conference room where Nathan, a successful lawyer is hearing a colleague present a case which the firm might be interested in taking. It involves a suit against an airline where several family members have died in the Caribbean due to negligence. Nathan does not quite agree with the presentation and decides it is not for the firm. At this time, an enigmatic man, who claims to be a Dr. Kay, arrives to speak with Nathan. The doctor watches Nathan while he puts sugar in his coffee; he is shocked by the amount of sugar the lawyer uses, so he warns him about possible health risks, something that is dismissed. The nature of Dr. Kay's visit is not immediately known, but the effect of his visit will linger in Nathan's mind and it will disturb him deeply. It is obvious Dr. Kay has come as some sort of messenger to warn about an impending doom, which is hard to understand. Nathan's life will be greatly transformed as he learns more about Dr. Kay's message. He is shocked when the doctor asks him to accompany to watch a horrible scene in a subway station. Kay also tells him about a lady who Nathan used to know and her impending demise. Dr. Kay also points to other matters that must be seen to in Nathan's own life, like the strange relationship between Nathan and Claire, his former wife. We get to know about the personal tragedy in their life and finally Nathan is told about why he has been chosen by Dr. Kay in what will be his own mission in life. "Afterwards" is not an easy film to grasp, yet there are rewards for the viewer that pays close attention to what really is underneath of what surfaces on the screen. Directed by Gilles Bourdos, and based on a novel "Et apres", which we never read, with Mr. Bourdos and Michel Spinosa's adaptation of the original material. The film is gorgeously photographed by Pin Bing Lee with an original musical score by Alexandre Desplat, a man with an excellent taste in whatever project he decides to undertake. The film was shot in different locales going from Quebec, to Manhattan to New Mexico. Romain Duris, a versatile French actor, is at the center of the film playing Nathan. In his first assignment for an English language movie, this amazing actor shows why he is one of the most interesting personalities working today. John Malkovich appears as Dr. Kay, the enigmatic man with a mission. Canadian beauty Evangeline Lilly is fine as Claire.

The movie overall was... ooookay. Performance was almost realistic, but I couldn't relate to the main character, though I don't think it's the actor's fault, it's just bad directing. I mean, seriously awful directing. It almost has nothing to do with the book. Honestly if I hadn't read it, i wouldn't have seen the movie. It is completely different from the book. Of course, the book is always better, but this is just too different. First of all, the clinic that is run by Dr. Kay ( Gudrich in the book ) is supposed to be a nice place, that does not look like a clinic at all. It is supposed to be an almost happy place, if that's possible. I don't think Duris should've been chosen for the role * though he did play it well considering the movie*, because Nathan is supposed to be a completely different personality. Secondly, the relationship between Nathan and Claire has not been shown consistently. The whole movie had this dull, tiresome atmosphere and nothing's ever happening. They've shown everything in a different light. In the book, there are ACTUALLY reasons, excuses for characters actions and all of the characters have an emotional depth that the movie just does not show. All in all, this is a movie probably worth watching if you haven't read the book, because it does have some life-is-worth-living motives and it actually can make you appreciate it more, but if you, on the other hand HAVE read the book, I'm begging you not to watch the movie, it will just ruin it for you.