20 Years After (2008) User Reviews

This is going nowhere really slow

[Great-Cthulhu · 3/10 · 23 April 2009]

One can't help but wonder how on earth anybody could read the script of this dross and then participate. Because, the actors are not half bad (for a movie of this category) and, while still in the land of zero budget, the overall look was okay too.

This flick's biggest problem is the storyline, or to be frank, the absence of one. Things just happen here, then there, the characters move from point A to B – its all very random and I really could not grasp the idea behind this whole sorry effort. It just makes no sense.

Watching this movie left me kinda blank in the head, like having tried to read a book in a language I don't understand.

Had the makers of 20 Years After bothered with a coherent story, this could have been okay – so it is just a way to waste 1.5 h of your life (in a very boring fashion).

Beware!

[jaddis01 · 2/10 · 7 January 2009]

I went to a red box, saw the cover (which looked interesting), and thought I'd give it a shot. From the beginning until the end it was one big snooze fest. The mediocre acting was all that kept this film slightly afloat. I've never commented on a movie here before, but I had to register to warn the public. It is a boring and pointless story. It was as interesting as finding a box of a strangers old home movies and sitting through them thanking heaven that you are not friends with these people. I cannot believe money was wasted on this movie, i.e., the cost to make it, rent it, even the electricity needed to play it. The character build up was all this movie had going for it and it failed. A big snore!

by the book low budget

[jo-farmer-1 · 4/10 · 29 September 2008]

I read the comments on this movie here before I saw it, so I expected nothing - and was pleasantly surprised. It's actually not that bad, suffers the same flaws that bothered nobody in "Children of Men".

Yes, the acting is sometimes bad, but not without it's moments: Reg E. Cathey gave a good performance, for instance. Acting is not the problem of this movie; directing and sound (effects) are.

As I said, I was pleasantly surprised and watched all through it, which I don't do on REALLY bad flicks. I'm giving it 4/10 because it had it's moments but I couldn't honestly recommend this to any of my friends (unless there is really nothing else at hand), who are not such nutters about movies as I am.

Low Budget / Bad Story / Bad Acting / Terrible....

[mark374 · 1/10 · 25 September 2008]

I am not against low budget films and when I caught a screening of this movie I was actually a little excited. The excitement quickly turned into agony as I forced myself to sit through it. The story was just plain boring, the acting was less then convincing and the effects were cheesy. There were parts that made no sense and didn't have anything to do with the story. I could see they tried to develop the characters but it was done so poorly and confusing that it just became a complete train wreck.

This reminded me of something that a High School drama club would have put together....

Slow paced, boring, and scored with horrible music

[krachtm · 3/10 · 14 May 2013]

The plot: A DJ, a pregnant woman, and some others try to survive in a post-apocalyptic world.

I don't know. I tried to give this film a chance. I saw all the negative reviews, and I thought to myself, "Maybe I'll like it. I don't mind slow pacing or low budgets, and I often like existential dramas." However, this was just too much to take. For vast stretches of time, nothing happens except people talking cryptically about stuff I really didn't care about. The music really annoyed me, but I figured they would move on from playing this horrible country music, eventually -- but, no, it just kept going on and on. I glanced at my screen and saw there was still another 30 minutes left. I admit it. I bailed. I couldn't take it any more. No more pointless dialogue about mystical crap, detestable music, or boring characters.

The plot is a ripoff of Children of Men, the actors are from TV shows, and the music will annoy anyone under 60. I really don't know who this film was made for, but it wasn't made for people like me. I guess it's meant to be an uplifting story about plucky survivors and their metaphysical journey to rediscover America, which has been blah blah blah. Who cares? I sure don't. It takes the worst of New Age hippies and low budget, B movies, throws them together, and mixes in a bunch of country music. Ugh. Truthfully, I would have preferred yet another mindless ripoff of Mad Max than this.

Read This First

[ChrisMichael81 · 1/10 · 26 September 2008]

First off I had to fill out a app here to comment on this as this movie is terrible. The people that made this should be ashamed of themselves including every actor, the writer(s), director, and who ever produced this and said they would invest in this. It really didn't make any sense. The person who wrote this was trying so hard to make the dialog artistic that the entire screenplay and interaction of the characters is painful to watch. Because of a nuclear blast and a some type of weather disaster (of which they don't name or explain in the movie) technology such as automobiles, computers, telephones cease to exist. Oh and everyone in the future becomes a trashy hippie according to this film. Not to mention you will notice that the entire movie is filmed in the same field. The lowest you can rate a movie here is a ONE which this movie did not deserve.

My Review

[joemamaohio · 2/10 · 5 November 2008]

20 years after the world comes to an end, Sarah (Azura Skye) is pregnant and about to give birth to the first baby in 15 years. She is pursued by people who want her baby, and she tries to find the mysterious voice on the radio (Joshua Leonard), who could help her.

Think "Children of Men" only without the great acting, effects and storyline. All this film is is a boring, lackluster hour and a half of worthless crap. Azura Skye was hardly in the film, and when she was acting, it was so quiet and monotone that it lacked any sense of urgency. And Michael (Leonard) is your typical end-of-the-world antagonist who talks about how life was like before it all happened. I would've loved to see what happened, I bet it would've been way more entertaining.

Lets leave this wasteland for another wasteland

[frequency-2 · 2/10 · 4 November 2008]

Most of the acting was interesting and done well. The story was a real drag that is a little difficult to pin down.

I would say it's mostly about some sort of romantic idea of the radio being a way people communicate. There's a pregnant woman whose main reason for leaving one place to go to another to give birth is to get away from her mother, because I didn't see any advantage for her ending up in an abandoned city.

The sci-fi premise just doesn't work. Whatever happened 20 years ago is not made clear in relation to why no children have been born. So the impetus of Sci-fi is cut off at the knees and is never even partially explained as to what happened beyond some sort of limited nuclear war.

I could live with that sort sort of premise, that nobody know what happened, but the world in the film just didn't look that bad, even at the end when they got to the city.

I spose it was meant to be ironic that the woman who wanted not to have her baby in a cave or in a basement ended up giving birth in an underground parking garage, but it came off more to me that that was all the set the production could afford at that point.

The movie does establish a sense of mood...but it's kinda sleepy coming down from smoking a dooby mood.

A clunker spoiler sorta

[JDsivraj · 2/10 · 8 February 2012]

Picture if someone had a good simple plot that was easy to relate to, had an interesting situation, borrowed a little from the fallout games and then totally screwed up the film, that's this movie.

It's incoherent at times and tries way too hard to have a message and be deep. It could have tried a little less psychological/metaphysical analysis and a tiny bit of coherence.

There is a dual or maybe triple quest going on here among the protagonists that is poorly developed and difficult to give a darn about.

SPOILER: Oh look one of the main characters is pregnant. No one has seen a kid in at least 15 years and some characters haven't ever seen a pregnant woman and yet it's still treated as a ho-hum sort of situation.

Another one to avoid...

[ulricjoh · 1/10 · 27 September 2008]

I should have read the comments from the production company "Everything that could go wrong did go wrong". It would be reasonable to believe that the makers were referring to the movie itself.

At this point, it would be fair to say that I don't mind small budget and video productions (hey, I even liked Blair Witch 1 & Cloverfield), but this piece of garbage doesn't even deserve a star - but 1 is the lowest that can be given.

I genuinely tried to sit through 20 minutes of this dross and couldn't stomach any more. Perhaps it got better (but I seriously doubt it).

It's so bad, that it's not even worth commenting on what was supposed to be going on in the script.

The bottom line is don't bother.

Obviously Low-Budget but all in all Pretty good show.

[rmp4 · 8/10 · 15 April 2009]

I can only assume this was a low cost production compared to your run of the mill Block Buster Titles, but as I am not one to turn away from a movie simply because it doesn't have awesome Hollywood cinematics poured into it, I rented this at my local video store. I was pretty impressed, the acting was actually really good IMO, and I liked the all around feel of the movie as it flowed along. There isn't much for special effects here is the only knock I guess you could really harp on, but I rank story quality over eye candy myself. I have actually researched the name "Jim Torres" after seeing this to check out more films he has directed, as a movie can only be as good as its director.

Existential, poetic, a little dull...

[Michael-d-duncan · 7/10 · 14 December 2009]

Okay, firstly most of the reviews on here are really REALLY terrible, and I agree this movie was okay at best.

I don't care about budgets and such, so the fact that the cinematography had a kind of unfinished feel to it didn't bother me, however I know it bothers some.

Next, and most detrimentally, there is very little forward movement. The plot is severely lacking, in the special features they mention that this was a stage performance before a film and I think the cutting floor scooped up a lot of explanations that could have really helped the audience to understand.

Now that being said this movie had some things that even most blockbuster films don't. One: SOME REALLY GOOD ACTORS. The actors are not wooden and don't pander to the camera (at least not most of them). The character Sara is specifically very convincing and easy to empathize with. Two: ORIGINALITY. This movie was not a typically post-apocalyptic mess. No radiation freaks, no scantily clad bikini babes, no dune-buggy rally... Finally: many of the visuals were stunning. (I'm thinking specifically about the blue bottle tree).

The existential feel of the movie is kind of like Darjeeling Limited, and really I give this movie a six not a seven, but I'd like to see another star on it's rating.

Really not THAT bad

[freezageeza1966 · 5/10 · 14 August 2015]

I've read a lot of the reviews for this movie and I believe it has been judged a little too harshly.There are far worse movies out there than this but hey,that's other reviewers opinions and I respect that.

This is yet another low budget,after the apocalypse effort that for a change actually has actors that act and not just turn up for the pay cheque.

As the title suggests,this is set 20 years after the apocalypse,that had forced people to live underground in basements,bunkers and caves.Now,in a slowly recovering world,people are venturing up and outwards in an effort to continue civilisation. We have the seemingly obligatory,(for movies of this type) "radio" man Joshua,playing music and messages from his bunker,to anybody left in the world with equipment to hear him. We have pregnant Sarah,who's husband was killed 6 months before,with her mother Margaret,surviving in an abandoned basement,until the homes real owner Samuel arrives on the scene and convinces them to venture forth to find or start a better life. And we have the also obligatory bad guys,this time searching for the as yet unborn baby.

So what was it that let this movie down?

It certainly wasn't the acting.Whilst not overly convincing,everyone plays their part reasonably well and special mention should go to Reg E. Cathey as Samuel as a stand out (though he doesn't get enough screen time here). Some of the bad guys/henchmen were a bit naff but nothing awful. Even the minimal action scenes were done reasonably well.

What lets this one down is the fact that so much that happens doesn't make a lot of sense.

No explanation is made as to why the bad guys want the baby. One of the bad guys is actually pregnant Sarah's brother.He has no idea the baby he is searching for is his sisters.Why?No back story or explanation is given. Apparently Sarah is THE only pregnant woman left despite the fact there are plenty of seemingly healthy men and women left.Why?

There were many head scratching moments......

However,this was for me still a watchable movie despite it's flaws and I remained reasonably entertained until the end.

So to quote a many repeated IMDb phrase from so many reviews......

Not the best,but very far from being the worst.

Run away like hell if you hear this movie is on

[rgslinger · 1/10 · 12 May 2009]

I vote level 1 for this movie for I cannot vote any less. This movie is worse than anything you have ever seen as "movie" This is not a movie, this is a disaster! Not only a waste of time but a great insult to the art of cinema!

I request only one thing from Mr.Torres and his accomplices: PLEASE do not make any movie or any other production in the future. That will be your BEST contribution to the art of cinema and world audiences will like you better if you do not appear in credits at all.

Geez, I cannot believe I had to write a commentary on such a waste but I guess it's my civic duty to warn other cinema fans.

I wanted to poke my eyes out with a spoon

[rmhoman · 1/10 · 14 October 2008]

okay where to start, first of all the story was jagged and discombobulated it had no rhythm what so ever. the special effects were absolutely appalling the acting was wooden and ridiculous. there were scenes that were cut weird and didn't make sense. for example a truck scene where the vehicle moves five feet and then there is a 2 sentence argument between the lead actors which i can only guess was added to show tension but failed miserably. At times the writing was artsy and then at times shallow and riddled with clichés. I can not fathom how this film won 3 awards they must have been bought. not only do I give one star to the movie but also one star to the film festivals who endorsed this garbage.

92% Bad

[BoulevardPark · 2/10 · 14 November 2008]

Let's start with the positive: Far and away, the best thing in this movie is Tara Nevin's AWESOME performance of "Stars Fell on Alabama". And Azure Skye is very nice to look at. The story leaves way too many questions not only unanswered but not even acknowledged. Like "What really happened?". "How come everyone is so clean and groomed if the water is (and has been for 20 years) full of toxins?" All the exposition comes in one big clump at the end, and it's totally non sequitur. Imagine a slightly less ridiculous explanation for everything than in Silent Hill. A guy who looks like he could be Lionel Richie's gay brother goes blathering on about some pseudo magical nonsense as he leads a pack of refugees into what seems to be a latter day low budget Burning Man camp. Bah! Once the movie got that far along I was only looking for more good music. When the ending comes, it's abrupt and hokey/smarmy, as if the filmmakers suddenly ran out of money or they just realised that it was a lost cause.

Awful, awful 20 Years later...

[acoigreach · 1/10 · 22 November 2008]

We sat through the whole thing since it had a deceptively provocative title (a la 28 days later, etc.) Post-apocalyptic films are notoriously B quality so I was prepared for that because I love this genre anyway.

Or so I thought.

This plot offered nothing new, but instead ripped off elements of other PA films like the Stand (evil leader calls the lost to his side in an apocalyptic end-game, black spiritual leader for the good people) and Magic(Anthony Hopkins and his creepy ventriloquist dummy), and why not good old punk haircuts for the "crazies" to make it REALLY post-apocalyptic?

They even threw in a Harper Lee/Faulknerian idiot man-child or two. For example, the inexplicable use of 2 (mentally retarded?) twins as minions of an evil 50 year old disappointed bride character were nearly as confusing as a "Trashcan Man/Lenny" thug covered with purple birthmarks all over his body.

The roles the African-American actors were relegated to was less than dignified. An old black professor turned in a toothy, Ben Vereen/Mr. Bojangles performance reminiscent of Hattie McDaniels or Jack Benny's Rochester such as early Hollywood allowed of black performers. Not to mention, one of the twins mimed an absolutely ridiculous Carl Spackler lip grimace throughout the whole movie. The South sure hasn't changed much has it?

The most confusing element of the whole film is the ventriloquist dummies that just seem to have absolutely no purpose whatsoever to the plot other than to utilize the fact that those things give everybody the damned creeps, however even this cliché is not developed logically.

The only reason I even spent time on this review is to recoup the wasted time and money spent on this clunker by exacting revenge...

As the end credits rolled on this film, my 11 year old son completely unprovoked said, "I spent so much time on this thing just now. I can't believe someone spent time and money making this. I would rather have smelled shoes..."

Out of the mouths of babes. I think that says it all...

Feels 20 years long

[sebpopcorn · 16 November 2009]

I like post-apocalyptic fiction so I thought this movie would be at least marginally entertaining. Things start well but the arrival of the jolly jester was when the alarm bells started ringing for me. All of a sudden the whole story turns limper than a puppets handshake and the violin rises to an annoying pitch and stays there till the credits.

My main problem with this film is that while it presents you with some interesting imagery the story has all the depth and meaning of a dirty fart. I still can't get over that pathetic jester-doctor character, was that supposed to be heart warming? Were we supposed to be spellbound by his juggling, unexplained magical antics and wise words? Because I wasn't, I was just irritated to realise that the guy who designed the cover for this movie had more imagination than the people making it.

Also, and this is a cheap shot, that woman with the ginger hair (Diane Salinger) looks like The Predator with his helmet off.

Stupid beyond belief

[txns19671 · 1/10 · 25 November 2012]

Should line them all against the wall and have them shot!!!!And then stood up to be shot over again! My goodness it's a wonder i even made it through 10 minutes without killing myself!!! Damn ! I guess people will watch just about anything!!! I wonder if this movie even broke even. The estimated budget is a mill. Probably grossed 40 thousand! ROFL Before watching I suggest that you rip your eyes out of the sockets! And then stick burning hot poker in your ears! It would feel better than watching this crap!!!!! And whats up with the stupid puppet? That dude has got to be a weirdo! "do you know anybody with a hot air balloon?" You do not hear that every day!!! LOL

The MOVIE needs to caught in a nuclear blast, and FORGOTTEN!

[ronia1 · 1/10 · 20 December 2008]

1. Acting: Deplorable, except the black guy know-it-all with the funky trashed ear 2. Editing: atrocious. As the movie tried to play through 3 to possibly 4 story lines, I literally felt like I was given ADHD because I could not physically sit through the end of the movie. The blue bottle tree becoming yet another uneventful side story was the last straw. That and the fully intact F150 in the cave with no wheels??? I mean c'mon! The KICKER is that this movie was shown on the redbox cover display as if it belonged up there with the "Best of '08" selections. You want to see a great movie from this year (or 07???) that will stick with you for many, many weeks? See no country for old men, and this time TLJ does NOT steal the movie. You'll see. But back to my limited synopsis. This movie sucks so bad it HAS to get at least ONE razzie!

Worst thing that has ever happened to me

[fanhocke · 1/10 · 2 January 2009]

I never thought I could hate anything so much. I am furious that something this bad could be made. I will not sleep until I get my money back from RedBox because this was just GARBAGE. I have never wrote any review on a movie, but this is the worst movie that has ever been made. Not at one point in the movie did any of the cast redeem themselves for even a moment. It is my goal to ruin anyone's life that had some contribution to this movie. I even want the catering service dead. I just hope that the director reads these to find out the huge failure that he is. If you work for Darfur, Anti-Smoking, Breast Cancer Awareness, or anything of the nature, you need to stop what you are doing and devote all of your time to letting people know that this is the worst movie that has ever been made.

Well worth watching.

[garou-9 · 9/10 · 26 October 2008]

I'd been looking for this movie for some time after encountering it mentioned on the site Quiet Earth. I'm glad that my perseverance paid off and I found it at a local video store.

While it's obvious that many of the actors have more experience on stage than in front of a camera, this in no way detracts from this gem. If anything, it only adds an intimate and fairy-tale quality of the movie. Do not expect a life-changing experience or an over-the-top action flick (in spite of it being post apocalypse). Do see it for what it is, a well directed and cast post modern myth. But be warned, that if you are one who needs myth distilled and crystallized, you will overlook the spider's web in the closing shot.

Pretty good movie - interesting story - good character dev.

[darkelfv · 7/10 · 22 December 2008]

I got this out of redbox - not knowing what to expect, go to redbox's site and look up the movie. The cover is totally different than what the movie ends up being about. There are no wolves or half naked, fully loaded women.

However I was caught and couldn't look away from the story and the characters that came into view. Yes there were some sci-fi bits that didn't make sense but in a setting of such, why not. Plus unexplained mysticism is as it should be.

I guess what it comes down to, I liked the story and the characters in it. I have seen plenty of high budget movies that were downright boring and had no meaning other then flash bang boom. I like movies that bring some good storytelling and allow one to think about some of the unknowns. Its like when you read a good book and the ideal and the story stays with your for a while. In a way it reminds me of how evil dead started. Low budget by just a few ppl.

Each to there own. I suggest you give it a try !!

Entertaining in the sense of awful.

[dazzleddb · 1/10 · 29 November 2008]

This movie is only any good if you like horrible movies.

Nothing made sense. And when I say nothing, I mean: nothing. I don't think I've ever asked the question "What?" so many times in the span of a couple hours.

The music never seemed to match the scene. The dummy was completely unnecessary. The acting was horrendous. Azura's character was not okay with having her baby in a cave (w/fresh spring water) but was perfectly fine with giving birth in an abandoned building. My biggest problem is with the baby crazed woman. She gives birth to a less than perfect baby (large birth marks and mentally handicapped) and is extremely bitter about it, so much so that she's abusive towards him.

What a waste.

[glanzer-markus · 5/10 · 20 September 2016]

The movie has had huge potential, but fails to deliver due to it's limited format and (probably) budget constraints.

In the beginning, hints are being dropped that peoples "balls were rotting off", adding gravity to the pregnancy, the whole movie revolves around. Unfortunately, there should have been more emphasis on communicating that vital plot detail for the movie to make sense.

I liked the characters a lot, and I think - aside from the wonky routine the twins show in the end - the overall acting is good. There just wasn't more in the script.

Aside from the badly communicated plot, the movie suffers from a huge pacing problem. It just crawls along, doesn't build much tension, and then all of a sudden tries to climax with 15 minutes of run-time left.

This could - of course - be something that probably works great on stage, but translates quite poorly onto film. I'm also curious if much of the movie's problems couldn't be solved by a different cut, but we might never find out.

Anyway - if you happen to like post-apocalypse as a genre, and feel the need to have seen everything on the subject, this is - by far - not the worst movie you'll come across.