In the Living Years (1994) User Reviews

Boring, Shallow and Corny Religious Propaganda

[claudio_carvalho · 1/10 · 10 July 2010]

While eating hot-dog in a square, Dan (Thom Mathews) hits on the gorgeous Sue (Megan Gallivan) and six months later he intends to propose her. However he feels affected by his relationship with his father and yellow in front of her parents. He writes a letter to his father exposing his troubled childhood after her left his family and how his life was affected by his divorce.

I have just lost 83 minutes of my life watching this film, actually a boring, shallow and corny religious propaganda of moral values. The acting is not bad but the screenplay is awful. My vote is one.

Title (Brazil): "Uma Carta ao Pai" ("A Letter to Dad")

Divorce ain't pretty

[bkoganbing · 3/10 · 6 November 2016]

Young Thom Matthews looks like he's headed to the altar with Meg Gallivan, but at the last minute he starts to balk and instead writes a letter to his long estranged father who abandoned him and his mother years ago. He asks for a meeting, but as he narrates the letter we get a flashback to his childhood and what dear old dad played by John Ashton was life.

A Letter To Dad is a sincerely made effort talking about the evils of divorce. It's never a pleasant thing, but truly there are some people who make a mistake in their choice of mate.

Of course it's also never easy on the kids if there are any. That's a complex subject and I don't think any film could do it justice. This one tries, but there are no easy answers.

Especially when one is hemmed in by fundamentalist Christian parameters.

Long dating montage followed by an even longer flashback.

[flackjacket · 1/10 · 16 June 2013]

May contain spoilers.

This movie was recently broadcast on a local TV station. So I decided to watch it... or rather, suffer through it. It begins when some guy asks a girl out to dinner after meeting her at a hot dog stand. She reluctantly agrees.

One would think the next scene would be their dinner together, maybe a little dialog between them showing why or how they had chemistry? But instead what follows is an extremely long music montage of fading scenes of them frolicking in the park, walking in the park, having fun in the park, giving her flowers in the park and kissing each other on the cheek in the park.

It goes on and on to the point you start saying, okay, we get it, move on... and BTW, what happened to the dinner scene?

Next, after what seemed to be an hour of them dating, frolicking and kissing in the park, free of any dialog, we reach 6 months later. And we find the guy (who we all should assume is in love due to the overly long music/dating montage) at a reggae concert? His new found love is somehow dancing at this concert. We still don't know why she's there, or why they fell in love. The guy happens to know the reggae singer (we don't know how).

He reveals to this new unknown, un-established character, that he's going to ask her to marry him... I'm not sure, but the next scene is apparently at her parent's house? At least I guess that's what we're all supposed to assume... along with that fact they are in love and both happen to know the same reggae singer.

Anyway, this is the place he planned to propose to her... at what appears to be her parent's house. He pulls the ring out under the table and suddenly chickens out. Then on the porch of what we all might assume is her parent's house, he tells her he's got issues and can't marry her.

Okay, totally boring so far, but it gets worse.

Flashback time. He begins to write a letter to his dad. What follows is what seems to be 3 hours of flashbacks to his childhood. Weird in that the flashbacks begin in sepia tone (so we all know it's the "olden days"). But as time drones on and on and on, the sepia tone goes color. Maybe they figured the audience would be asleep by then and not notice they were no longer in sepia flashback land, but rather watching an entire different movie.

Eventually, after what seems to be an eternity, they get back to present day, wrap up the film with him proposing, within minutes, they're married have a kid and reconcile with his previously mean dad.

I get the moral of the story: Don't be a bad dad and it's never mom's fault. But personally, although I understand the sappy sentimentalism and half right moral, this movie was not only disjointed and painfully long, it was one of the worst I've ever seen.

Waste of time

[genamax · 1/10 · 29 March 2014]

Weak storyline, one-sided, and a religious advertisement. In short, complete waste of time. Is it really true that all failed relationship is always one party's fault? The other party is an angel? Even if she is carrying on with another while married? What did religion have to do with this? Suddenly out of nowhere it was jammed down our throat. I could not suffer through finishing the crap, stopped at 75 minutes. That's 75 minutes of my life I'll never get back. I wish there was a lower rating than "awful" I could assign to this worthless waste-of-time movie. It got me frustrated and made me angry. I was anticipating some real point to be made, when suddenly turned into nonsense, one-sided, irrelevant direction.

A true story every father should watch.

[imdb-19683 · 8/10 · 16 August 2010]

It was so refreshing to watch a film without the usual gratuitous Hollywood garbage that I almost didn't notice the script problems. Given the choice between a few Bible verses here and there, or suffering through another 90 minutes of swearing, sex, and situations, I'll take the Bible verses. Yes, its a little slow and predictable--but then, real life usually is. Being true to life, some of the material might not be appropriate for young children. Actually, the script is not that bad for a first effort. On the other hand, the acting, music, and especially the story make it very worthwhile. The fact that this is a true story makes the message of the film very powerful. As a struggling father of four myself, I highly recommend it for every dad!

Shows how divorce affects the family

[ajoffroy · 7/10 · 18 July 2010]

This is a family drama about a boy named Dan who writes a letter to his dad when he's in his mid twenties. We see his life done in flashbacks through the letter. Although slow at times, the performances were good. Especially John Ashton (Beverly Hills Cop) Mario Van Peebles and Corin Nemec, who played the teenage version of Dan. The movie has a nice score supported by songs from Christian performers, Jeremy and Thousand Foot Krutch. I noticed that the movie did receive 5 Doves from The Dove Foundation, their highest rating. The movie is a tear jerker and a little over the top at times but I recommend this movie to anyone who's gone through a divorce.

This movie is awful

[bless174 · 1/10 · 30 December 2014]

I'm a Christian and feel like movies like this one are the exact reason Christian movies fail. The whole movie was under developed on every aspect. It's as if the writer had a general idea of what the movie was about but no idea how to bring it realistically to life. I watched this with my family (4 kids) whom my husband(of 21 years) is a 3 year recovered alcoholic. My mom was married 3 times, my own father was/is absent, step father - abusive alcoholic, last step father was an amazing man... All this to say we all found this movie stupid, unrealistic, and emotionally so detached we actually wanted to fling the disc off the side of the mountain. There are much better family movies, find another, this one is so freaking dumb, honestly.

Recommending this movie for Health Programs taught in Schools

[svonsawilski · 10/10 · 5 December 2017]

There are recurring issues which teenagers face regarding their parents. Looking to them as role models and influences for their future real time teenagers can discuss and observe some of the loop holes and issues that occur in this familiar scenario of parental abandonment and neglect. With a view to reconciling their past with their future and finding a way not to allow the past to impinge on their future self.