After... (2006) User Reviews

Was this a serious attempt at a movie?

[big_daddy_jeezus · 3/10 · 27 October 2007]

For a very amateur attempt at a movie, it actually started out well. i read the plot of the movie and it sounded entertaining. But, much like communism that built the underground in moscow, this plot only works on paper. half way through it turns into the wall by pink floyd, and then back again. even the technical aspects of it are extremely cheesy...don't get me started on the "military" guys wearing only gas masks in a "nuclear environment", etc etc etc...but i think it was just the guys imagination, but no one really knows...i guess I'm one of those morons who didn't "get it"...but then again, i don't think there's anything to "get"...oh, the sound track was good and fitting...i'd rather watch a program on how escalators are made.

-bob

Thinks it's better than it is

[brettp-2 · 3/10 · 16 August 2009]

The concept of the movie sounded good on the DVD box, but the movie itself was a real let down. This is one of those movies where the people that actually like it just say so because they think they're supposed to. It's an art-house indie type of film, and some people feel like they really want to "get it" so they ramble on about how they do.

Well, there really isn't much to get in this film. If you're even half-way paying attention you'll figure out the whole concept - and where it's ultimately heading - pretty quickly. Yes, that means I did "get it."

They take very little time to actually create a story line, or to develop any characters. Much of the "back story" is told in flashbacks (a fairly cheap movie trick these days), and by the time certain things are revealed you don't really care much about the people anyway.

The actors did their best with a weak story and little dialog, so I do give them credit for that. The camera work was OK but the style gets old almost immediately. This "hand-held" looking like the actors are doing the filming has been done often before and to far better effect than you'll see here.

Overall, I would say skip this movie. It fails as horror, fails as thriller, and if you go in looking for either of those things you'll see what I mean. It's just ends up being boring, predictable, and pointless.

After...I laughed till I cried...

[Nathaniel_William · 2/10 · 7 January 2008]

As a True urban explorer i can say this movie is anything but true to urban exploring and completely unrealistic. If you have been urban exploring watch this movie and you'll know what I'm talking about. However if you've never been urban exploring DO NOT use this as a reference on how to do it as it is anything but accurate. To see what true raw undramatized urban exploring is just go search the web for urban exploring and you'll see what I mean...

Urban Exploration is the exploring of areas that have been lost to society or abandoned and hidden to the world that no one knows about (except maybe the homeless) including tunnels yes so i will give the movie credit for that and the fact that you do have to have the proper equipment and research prior to going but not on the level of the equipment they carried...I mean who the hell carries a radiation detector on them...and they didn't have a respirator mask and they were also very careless with the use of their equipment especially flashlights waving them around in the open for police and others to spot them...and i have never heard of anyone using a body bag on an exploration as equipment...and in no way is urb-ex as described: "Urban Explorers are extreme sports' answer to computer hackers" it is not an extreme sport and does not involve base jumping ever, thats not a good way to escape the cops because you will be caught...base jumping is not urban exploring!!! Although it is true, urban exploring can be a dangerous hobby, it in NO WAY would ever present dangerous settings as the ones depicted in the film (i.e. - radiation) unless you reside or explore in a nuclear war-zone or in a area suspected of such conditions. thats what the research is for. Asbestos poisoning is a much bigger threat than radiation...

It starts out with the explorers jumping out of a van and running out in the open to a small hole in the wall of a building with loads of gear on and super bright flashlights on their heads...because that wouldn't draw attention!!! and basically, without giving too much away...the plot does not tie together well mostly due to the fact there is a cut scene/shot every 3-5 seconds of the film including flash backs every other shot. as a matter of fact the plot is very vague and only implied. Unless you do some really powerful hallucinogenic drugs before exploring it will be nothing like the film. The main thing that made me upset about this movie was that it was a disappointment and let down as it claimed to be the essence of urban exploring but in many cases was not and was a total dramatization and blown ridiculously way out of proportion and in the long run turned out to be nothing about it in the final conclusion. This movie was just made (in my opinion) to try and scare people from going exploring and prevent illegal trespassing and encourage the safe tourism of historical landmarks open to public (partially because of the clips in the credits) but who knows, maybe it was meant to encourage urb-ex to find out whats really out there...or where you really are!!??? i think...

On one last final note: I will say that it had a very interesting attempt to jazz up the hobby and make it seem more hardcore than it really is although in some areas it can, like the movie suggests, be highly dangerous and precautions should be highly taken into consideration...

I hated every single frame of this film.

[BA_Harrison · 1/10 · 11 February 2011]

Erratic camera-work, extreme close-ups, shifting focus, and rapid cuts: when utilised sparingly by a proficient director working in conjunction with a skilled editor, these movie-making techniques can help to effectively convey urgency, panic, and terror; however, in the hands of a less talented film-maker, one who lacks the finesse and experience to make judicious use of such methods, the results can be virtually unwatchable. Such is the case with David L. Cunningham's After.

I've seen a lot of bad films in my time, but there are very few that I loathe with such intensity as this virtually unwatchable mess, 76 minutes of migraine inducing garbage during which Cunningham never once uses a tripod, rarely sustains a shot for over a second, dispenses with such trivialities as keeping his picture in focus, and shines as many bright lights directly into the camera lens as humanly possible.

If all of that wasn't bad enough, the plot is completely unfathomable for 99% of the running time, after which all becomes clear(ish) with a trite twist ending that didn't even seem all that fresh over two decades ago when Adrian Lyne used it for Jacob's Ladder (a film that After clearly strives to emulate).

Makes No Sense, But Worth Watching!

[art-321 · 5/10 · 19 October 2007]

OK, first & foremost this can best be described as a mind-f**k film. I'm sure there will be some reviewers out there who will see this as a "breathtaking masterpiece" but these are the same people who can see Jesus in a hunk of cheese. For those of you not blessed with this gift, you are more likely to get to the end of the movie & go Huh? It's like you took a couple of guys on acid & locked them in an editing room until they finished your movie. That being said, it does merit being watched because of the unusual camera work, the in your face lighting & big close up shots of someone's eyeball while they're freaking out (a la Blair Witch). Apparently our lead character has lost a young daughter & then base jumps off a roof, goes to Moscow, crawls underground, sees radiated people, hallucinates, sees his dead daughter, watches his friends get shot & disappear, camera spins around has flashbacks to a happier time when daughter was alive, wakes up, boards a train, sees his life flashing by on TV's then end of movie. That's all while the camera is wobbling around like a drunk on a tightrope. So if you would like some serious eye candy (or just like to get high & watch movies) then I recommend this film.

Bad, Real BAD, REALLY BAD, and then it got WORSE!

[georgembaxter · 1/10 · 1 May 2012]

SPOILER IN HERE! The movie has lots of shaky cam,Blair Witch stile(hated that movie also)and I found myself trying to figure out whats going on, only to find there just lousy film makers. And for the people that complained that is was a short movie, it seemed like for ever to me!

About half way through I figured it out. Things do not just disappear in star trek transporter fashion and walls do not move. This all must be in his mind. Yep I was right! He died jumping off and the hole Moscow thing was in his mind on the way down. Get it now? This was a total waste of my time and $1,000,000 of the people who put there money into it. At times you think maybe there is some story here, the ruskies are up to something. But no it's just stupid, no plot, but he's messed up in the head. I just watched it what was it called again? It was that good.

It's like a look into a crazy person's mind so what's there to watch then?

[nisha_francois_mimi · 1/10 · 17 November 2011]

A nonsense movie and a complete waste of your time. WARNING: CONTAINS Spoiler: (Don't read if you want to watch it.) It started out to be interesting as three friends explore underground secret chamber that is off to public because it was said to be a torture chamber. It's a psychological thriller,so I'll just spoil it for everyone so you guys don't waste your time watching this shaky hand cam held movie.To make the long story short- it's about a man who becomes paranoid and delusional dealing with the death of his daughter. His life flashbacks in televisions inside the train he boarded. His flashbacks were mixed of the real events that happened to his life and what he could have done instead. The movie is all about him being delusional trying to cope up with his regrets by altering his mind on what had happened. How they shot the film is too shaky. My eyes hurt. Plus,there's too many flashbacks that you don't know what is happening anymore. You are not gonna get it until the movie is ending and only to find out it's about the main character's delusion and nothing else.

Nuclear stupidity + Psycho = After

[altainta · 1/10 · 25 June 2007]

This movie is a not good... I literally fall asleep after several scenes of Eye Rotating.... THis movie is worst in my list. It is like a a noob handling a camera and shooting in the basement. I didn't like the movie.. I do not know how this movie got 5.5 in IMDb. This Movie really Stinks i would Say DO NOT WATCH IT..Also i din't understand many parts of the Movie. I thought this movie will contain stuff like robots and hackers. But it contains things like Nuclear emission and a psycho who is the lead of the story line always thinking about his family (specially her daugther who died or being kidnapped). This movie doesn't have a good story plus the ending is also not good. It seems that the guy imagination come true. Well after looking at IMDb review i thought that this movie will be good but i would say No IT IS NOT at all good.

CoNfUsE and understandable...

[para_cenas1 · 1/10 · 20 August 2010]

Aufull movie!!! We can't really tell what's going on and what that is all about. What was their first objective ? Why did they gone there anyway ? What were they looking for ? Did they pretended to get away in first place ? What happened to the guy who survived ? Did he really survived and got out of there? Why did the bodies disappear ?it makes no sense and it has too many flashbacks from the children witch were simply irrelevant to the understanding of the movie. And finally, it's supposed to put you scared, but even that they made wrong, the cameras don't get clear pictures and they're always moving around to fast... To put it in plain English: A MESS

Everything about this movie sux!

[rwagn-620-792438 · 1/10 · 28 February 2013]

What a terrible waste of time, effort and money. Save yourself the excruciating frustration and run, run away from this film. An absolute piece of malarky not worthy of the celluloid it rests within. All of the enlightened reviewers who find cosmic awareness and answers in this mess are just fooling themselves. Don't get me wrong. I love "difficult" movies. This however is not one of them. I concur with a prior reviewer who stated it appears somebody was locked in an editing room and not allowed to leave until they concocted something that ran 90 minutes. What's wrong? A crappy script you can see coming from almost the beginning, bad acting, horrendous camera angles (note: pretentious camera angles do not make poop like this into art), really bad music that sounds like outtakes from a rave and the fact that somebody somewhere greenlighted this atrocity. Not a so-bad-it's-good type film. Pass on this unless you have a masochistic streak or more time to waste than I do.

You've got it wrong - AFTER is a good film.

[redbearfilms · 8/10 · 25 June 2007]

I do not understand the negative comments posted here. This film is definitely worth watching. The movie held me to the very last frame. Maybe because I "got it" where some didn't. This film makes you think, and the cinematography, editing and sound fit perfectly with the style of story telling. I found the characters very believable and the tunnel shots kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time. And the music - the music provided the perfect ambiance.

I normally don't react to the comments of others but their negativity is uncalled. There are really bad movies out and this is NOT one of them. Maybe the other reviewers expected a formulaic piece of fluff - AFTER is definitely not that. Give this movie a chance. It's a very good film.

Starts good, ends bad

[slake09 · 6/10 · 4 July 2007]

The film starts out well, with urban explorers doing their thing. They film their exploits and post them to a web site, gaining fame and friends along the way.

Then they go on a trip to Moscow and things go haywire. It's a good movie up to that point, but when the surrealism starts the fun is all over. You can't tell what is really happening, what parts are just surrealism, and what is just some kind of flashback. That spoils the whole intent of the movie - if you don't know what's going on, it's hard to enjoy.

It's not a bad movie, and I liked watching it, but the whole thing was spoiled for me by the repeated flashbacks, people coming back to life, people disappearing, walls fluctuating, etc. I lost the thread of what was really happening at that point, and so stopped caring.

In a lot of ways it reminds me of Primer, another movie that was good but somewhat hard to keep track of.

Worst Horror Movie to Date!

[michael-bryner · 1/10 · 28 October 2007]

I give this a 1, because there is not really a good Plot. The movie was boring from the beginning, until the end. It basically had nothing different running through the whole movie. Who ever made this movie must of been on some drugs. This movie was rated R. There were no cussing. There were no gore. There was no scare. There was hardly any talking. Mostly like running and walking around Moscow underground corridors. I have never seen such a dull movie in my entire 36 years of life, If I even seen a movie when I was an infant. If I was an infant and watched this it would not be any different than now. This movie made no sense. The ending was not much of an ending either. All of a sudden your bored out of your mind, and at 1 hour and 10 minutes into movie the guy is just hallucinating and the movie ends. That is only 70 minutes long movie. What a crock. Movies like horror used to be as short as 80 minutes in the 70's and 80's, but now a days movies are 2 hours long. You will be wasting your 70 minutes on this. Don't bother and if you already have, I feel sorry that you did.

not a bad flick

[manastash · 4/10 · 23 June 2012]

i may have to watch it a few times to get it but ..other than trying to watch it during the dark tunnel scenes.. its pleasing to the eye and the dialog doesn't make me wanna puke and the music is great! I could actually feel dads grief. i am kinda confused about the ending but i am still trying to muddle thru realty and whatever was going on elsewhere.So all in all give this movie a chance.. maybe have a shot of tequila to keep you company and just enjoy the visual effects and the movie and maybe in a dream it will all come together for you. I did watch it on an HD 70 inch LCD so i think that helped a little and i paused it when i was confused.. which was quite a few times.

Not original...but really terrible

[rando99 · 1/10 · 5 February 2013]

OK, I'm one of the ones "who got it" and I still "hate" this movie. The idea of urban explorers going into dangerous buildings was the original idea, but everything else...especially the ending was just "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" or "Vanilla Sky" all over again. The opening scene fooled me at first, because they said their death farewells (I thought the girl was going to die). Later, when the flashbacks and delusions began, I said to myself "oh no, the girl didn't die, the GUY did, in the opening scene." So I switched to another channel. After reading the reviews here, I realized I was right and glad I didn't sit thru anymore of the crap that was the rest of the movie. Fortunately for me, I read the short story "Owl Creek Bridge" many many years ago in high school, before I saw it on TV. I think they should have stayed with the extreme explorer idea.

Want to see it again.

[stephswish · 9/10 · 24 September 2007]

The movie had a slow start but it had a very interesting perspective after a bit. It sort of introduces you to the whole urban explorer thing then gets into the story heavily. Very dynamic ending and exciting twists.

I feel sorry for the girl, she had it that hardest, will sort of. : 0 That would be one hell of a way to spend your vacation. Sort of a bit of hell meets extreme sports adventure. Either way it was fun to watch. Just wouldn't want to go there myself.

I think this is one of those movies that will be very interesting to watch a second time on DVD. There is so much going on!

A psychological thriller about life, death and how to escape both

[razvan_bucksapeace · 7/10 · 19 June 2007]

This is a movie about guilt, regret, the paths that we take in life and in the end about Urban Exploring.An original film about claustrophobia and the never ending question:What if? There were moments when i would have payed double to skip to the end because i couldn't stand the hallucinations and the flashbacks any more. The first 40 minutes where interesting but then it turned into the last few moments of someones life, and you can tell through out the movie by the presence of the ferryman of the river Styx. Worth watching once,but it's not something worth talking to your colleagues at work the next day. I hope the comment was useful and enlightening and if you're looking for a thriller/horror, keep looking! Thank You.

thriller meets art-house

[pussycat406 · 10/10 · 7 November 2006]

Even though it was completely sold out, I was able to score tickets to see After... at its premiere at the AFI film festival, and I was blown away. How did such a freaky, convoluted, twisted story get made totally under the radar like this? The cinematography is a bit wild, and near the beginning I found myself sort of confused and disoriented, not sure what was happening, or where. However, shortly into the movie you forget about that discomfort, and get sucked into the story (confusing and disorienting by no accident, I'm sure). And if there was ever a story that would be visually supported by the spastic hand-held look, this is it. Basically, I think the filmmakers nailed it. They were able to meld the intense world of urban exploration with a supernatural thriller, and make it have some depth to the story for a discerning audience. The Crystal Method soundtrack was perfect, the actors' performances solid, and the editing and sound design top notch. Cross your fingers that this one will have a good theatrical release and come soon to a theater near you.

It was okay, for this type of movie.

[pastmosaicmember · 6/10 · 23 September 2007]

This movie keeps your attention. I didn't like the extreme camera angles. Guess that is how this kind of movie is suppose to be. But it made it hard to focus on what was happening. The lighting was amazing, however.

The acting seemed flawless. I am not an expert on these things, but over all the actors and all seemed good. I saw it at a special screening and many people seemed to like it even better than myself. Loved the music of course - GO Crystal Method!!! I wanted a more uplifting story - that probably would seem cheezy in a movie like this though.

Glorious Ride (and Head Trip)

[appleseed2000 · 9/10 · 31 March 2008]

Director David L. Cunningham takes the audience on a rough-edged ride with three extreme thrill-seekers, running us out of the blocks with a dramatic BASE jump and hauling us into Moscow's underground subways, chiefly the infamously secret Metro-2 line purportedly built in Stalin's time. Guerrilla-style in the actual tunnels, this is head-spinning film-making, an experience where rushing trains rattle your teeth; when a character scratches his neck, your neck itches too; and you feel irradiated an hour in. Without giving it away, the movie's a head- flip on a story level too, as screenwriter Kevin Miller and Cunningham rope in themes of love, guilt, regret, and bottomless loss so densely with the adventure that you're still sifting through them long after the credits have played.

The sharp intimate scenes and claustrophobic mood are highly suited for DVD view.

Self Exploration, not Urban exploration.

[Indifferent_Observer · 7/10 · 30 April 2012]

I can see why this movie flew over so many peoples heads. You have a lot of people that actually believe this film is about Urban Exploration and are mad that they didn't get it. Its about exploration alright, but if anything self exploration.

I'll be the first to admit this movie does require the utmost attention or you will get lost quick. This isn't really a watch with friends type movie. It starts with some Urban Exploration and quickly morphs into strange dreamlike sequences. I am not going to spoil it so all I can say is if you have a really good attention span and like surreal horror/adventure movies then give it a shot.

This movie also has a strong re-watchability factor. I have seen it 3 times and know there are frames and sequences I have missed.

Excellent, one of the most underrated horror films I know of.

masterpiece of independent cenama

[oobe-419-873889 · 10/10 · 1 August 2012]

well... yeah... so at the beginning I was like "ok, I like this, but when will the real movie begin" and then I realized this IS the real movie and was like "woah". WHAT. A. MOVIE. Sure, it borders on experimental cinema but whetever I've seen my share of weird cinematic experiments, I can watch it. And I did. And it was AWESOME. Unknown American filmmakers, I salute you. I don't know what you were trying to accomplish here but you've created a masterpiece of independent ciema. I don't know, maybe you're just some undeground explorers who brought a camera along, or maybe you're some cinema-art students who had this idea, whatever, YOU'VE MAYDE IT. If I was a judge at some sort of a independent movie convention I would not only give this 10 out of 10 but I would nominate this for an Oscar or something. I pay my respects and I know probably you'll never make it, you'll remain in the "undergound" forever but know this: this one guy though your movie was a masterpiece.

It came together well.

[jjsterrnn · 8/10 · 22 September 2007]

I liked how it kept you guessing, and then it all comes together in the end with a very interesting plot. The characters could have used a more of a background. But in some ways that adds to the intrigue. The camera work is a bit distracting, but once again it sort of draws me into the story all the more. I liked it overall.

The sets were incredible. It looks like the real deal. Maybe it was? I want to see it again, and look closer this time. Can't wait until the DVD comes out.

The screening I was at was awesome, great sound and picture. The movie is short, but so intense it seems much longer.

Didn't Get It Until the End...Wonderful

[matthew-raymond-willis · 9/10 · 28 November 2010]

This movie made me feel more claustrophobic than anything I've ever watched. I almost turned it off half way into it; but I couldn't make myself do it because I just had to figure it out.

Initially, this unsettling sense is caused by the physical situations in which the characters place themselves. However, the feeling of claustrophobia evolves, as the movie progresses, into pure psychological claustrophobia as you, the viewer, become lost in the main character's recalled memories.

It wasn't until very near the end of the movie (as planned by the film makers) that I realized what was happening: the entire movie takes place in the main character's mind as he sees his life flash before his eyes on the way to his death.

You witness these final moments of his life (which likely include his last thoughts after impacting the ground too) reliving his decisions and regrets.

The editing, lighting, camera angles and acting all fit together perfectly to build this story within a story, which takes place completely within the main character's head.

I loved it and will watch it again as soon as I recover from the first experience...

Well conceived.

[lluvett · 8/10 · 24 September 2007]

I thought AFTER... was a well conceived film. The foreshadowing was well executed. I like the "passengers" traveling with you under 16 reference. The chemistry between characters was good. I don't understand why they didn't turn off their lights doing scenes where they could be caught. His guilt was well established throughout as well.

Like I said about the lights and stuff, I guess the situation of "where" we were in the film explains much of it. It makes sense in the end.

All the locations looked really good, too.