A drama centered on three people who are haunted by mortality in different ways. George (Matt Damon) is a blue-collar American who has a special connection to the afterlife. On the other side of the world, Marie (Cécile de France), a French journalist, has a near-death experience that shakes her reality. And when Marcus (identical twins Frankie McLaren and George McLaren), a London schoolboy, loses the person closest to him, he desperately needs answers. Each on a path in search of the truth, their lives will intersect, forever changed by what they believe might-or must-exist in the hereafter.Written by
Warner Bros. Pictures
One of the few movies executively produced by Steven Spielberg that has neither an Amblin Entertainment nor DreamWorks Pictures symbol in the ads representing his involvement. (The Amblin logo does appear at the end of the movie.) See more »
The Tube station where Markus narrowly misses a terrorist bombing is incorrectly identified as Charing Cross Station. None of the July 7 bombings took place anywhere near Charing Cross. The external shot of the station was taken of the Liverpool Street station where one of the bombs actually did explode on a train which had just left the station. The sign on the exterior was digitally altered to Charing Cross. See more »
Did you do the reading?
Look, you still don't get it, do you? You think just 'cause I can make money doing this... just because I can, that I should do it.
Yeah, yeah I do. I also think you have a duty to do it, because you have a gift.
It's not a gift, Billy, it's a curse.
See more »
The mid 80s-late 90's Warner Bros. shield is used and is in black and white at the beginning of the movie, and at the end of the credits, the same Warner Bros. Shield is used alongside the Amblin logo, also in black-and-white. See more »
The pacing of this film did not bother me. Of course, I am over 50, so I can actually sit still through a slower paced storyline that includes a number of different characters, without something blowing up, or someone getting undressed to keep my attention.
What did bother me, perhaps comes from a unique view from others reviewing the film. As one who has experienced an NDE, I was disappointed with both the flimsy, and undeveloped view of the female lead's experience, and the ambiguous way in which her story unfolded.
On one hand, we have a character whose NDE was so life-altering, as to divert her from her primary job as a political reporter, into someone who writes a book extolling the difficulty in revealing the truth in the modern media world about the validity of the NDE experience. The dust jacket on her book, as well as casual references to her research, talk about all of the expert testimony that support the overwhelming facts about NDE experiences, and the correlation between science and the afterlife. And then the movie tells us nothing.
The script (or perhaps what was left after Eastwood edited the script) simply glosses over anything substantial in the way of research, except to talk about a Nobel laureate who was ridiculed after revealing his research. One line...out of over two and a half hours of script.
The question to me, is why start the conversation, if you aren't going to offer even a small slice of the answers? The research is voluminous. Those of us who have experienced an NDE know that it is far more than a chemical reaction to the body starting to shut down. Much more.
But, all we are left with in this movie, is a lead character who doesn't want to acknowledge his gift, even in the face of those around him who believe in a "hereafter," more than he does.
Anyone who has experienced an NDE will find this movie sadly unfulfilling. But perhaps, it will bring many more of us to admit to what happened, and start a much more meaningful dialogue about the facts.
As a few of the younger reviewers mentioned, a vast majority of the audience was over 50. No doubt many of those there were looking for answers about the "aferlife," for one reason or another.
It would have been a great chance to tell the world something substantial. But in the end the movie was a nice idea, with slow execution...and painfully unfulfilling.
97 of 174 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this