Review of After Life

After Life (1998)
7/10
Good movie, definitely worth watching, but I would have liked more philosophy
23 February 2008
The underlying premise and theme of this film is extremely thought-provoking. Within the first 20 minutes, your brain will light up like a Christmas tree as you think of the implications and how you would react in a similar situation. It has the magical ability to awaken nostalgic memories of your own, and several times I had to pause the film so that I could indulge my own private thoughts for a while. Hats off to the director/writer for achieving the necessary balance between fantasy and realism (i.e., taking you to a surreal place whilst not destroying the human perspective).

But the downside... I feel that the director failed to cultivate some of the excellent philosophies which were barely touched upon. This could have been accomplished with more dialogue. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of *talking* in the movie, but it's mostly anecdotal (people wistfully reminiscing about the past). There wasn't enough analysis and barely any *dialogue* (people communicating with each other).

Without ruining anything, I'll give you one example. The premise is, of course, "if you had to pick one memory to relive forever, which would you choose?" One character simply refuses to pick. This is brilliant. As soon as he takes his position, which he does in the first 10 minutes of the film, it woke me up and made me wonder why he would choose this unconventional act of defiance.

But much to my disappointment, this central theme is abandoned. The character is hardly seen again. He does deliver an interesting monologue towards the end which is encapsulated in a single powerful statement he says (I won't tell you what it is). But I couldn't help feeling as if the director didn't really follow through with his philosophy.

Perhaps that was the intent of the director: to present us only with fragments so that we may ponder the philosophy ourselves. But that approach somewhat betrays the nature of art. Art, I believe, should do its best to communicate a complete idea, and *then* open up the floor for discussion. Anything less is a mere Rorshach test. Or whatever you call those inkblot thingees that psychologists use to probe your mind.

As you can probably guess, I'm not a big fan of the Minimalist movement.

Another gripe... Some of the interesting philosophical points were shoved aside to make room for the romantic sub-plot, which I found to be a bit forced and unbelievable. I would have preferred to see the director stick to the heavier issues. If this is truly a film about deep spirituality, why dedicate so much time to a teenage girl's crush on a guy?

So my overall criticism is that there wasn't enough substance presented. I admit there IS the possibility that the dialogue/philosophy I craved was lost in translation. It is possible that the English subtitles didn't convey the philosophy inherent in the original Japanese. That's been known to happen.

But still, I think this film could have truly benefited by a good old fashioned Shakespearian soliloquy, like Hamlet Act III Sc 1, to help clarify the director's message.

Well, here I've wasted my whole review babbling about philosophy, and I haven't touched upon the technical merits of this film. Let me just wrap up by reiterating that THIS IS A GOOD FILM despite my criticism. I love the way the director achieved a surreal feeling without using gimmicky, schlocky clichés like pearly gates and angels and pixie dust. Everything about the production is firmly rooted in reality despite the very unrealistic nature, and that achieves a very bizarre and clever paradox. Also there's no music at all. It's an original, I'll definitely give it that! Give it a whirl. I'll probably watch it a 2nd time myself.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed