DVD - Hereafter

Disappointment. It's worse than watching an awful movie that you know is going to be bad. With Hereafter, I had heard some mediocre things about it, and it didn't even end up getting a theatrical release here. But I thought that you couldn't really go wrong with a Clint Eastwood movie. For starters, this movie is quality stuff. It's not like there's really crappy direction or random things falling out of nowhere or boom mics visible everywhere. No, it's a quality film. Unfortunately, this movie goes wrong on so many other aspects. It claims to deal with death, which is, of course, a very sad thing. But does it ever deal with it? I didn't think so. This film was really just two hours of people thinking they have a special connection to the 'afterlife'.

So here's my plot summary, done with the help of MS Paint:

These three stories are all 'connected' by one thing: a fascination with the afterlife. But the problem is, other than that, these stories have as much in common as a bean, rabbit and book shelf. They run along together like we're watching three separate films at once, instead of amalgamating nicely. When they finally did come 'together' at the end, it just felt really weird. What was even more annoying was the fact that the film didn't really end. I'm sure it was meant to be ambiguous, but it didn't go about that the right way. To be honest, when the end of the film finally came around, I was just happy that it was over and I didn't really care much for the characters any more.

The characters themselves didn't really gel well with me, either. It was a tricky subject to tackle, sure. But instead of taking this with a gentle approach, the film was instead very melodramatic. Matt Damon's character, George, seemed very whiny. I also thought that Damon was miscast in the role - he just didn't seem very vulnerable at all. However, I did quite enjoy the scenes he had with Bryce Dallas Howard, because they had some really good chemistry and the way their relationship was done was pretty interesting. Other than that, I really didn't enjoy his character/performance at all. Cecile de France plays the French journalist who survives a tsunami, and she seems really whiny too. I think I may have missed something, but I really didn't get why she was so fascinated with the afterlife. I realise that she was survived a pretty traumatic experience, but I don't think there was really enough for me to make me believe in her plight to get the afterlife known. But the story I didn't like the most was the one about the twins. This one was generally forgotten in favour of the others, and therefore it lacked emotional resonance. 

Hereafter has a very intriguing premise, but the results were anything but intriguing. It started out well, with a pretty impressive tsunami scene which was rightfully awarded an Oscar nomination for visual effects. Other than that, this film is basically Oscar-baiting gone terribly wrong. Good premise? Check. A few actual events? Check. An all star cast and an amazing director? Check. None of these could actually help Hereafter become worthy. It moves as slow as a snail, never bothers to surprise the audience and it feels like a car stuck in first gear. In short, I thought Hereafter was a terrible film. It's not one of the worst films I've seen, but it comes close. The film never really started, and it never really ended. Instead, there were three stories of people who I didn't understand, and just found whiny. Never did I think that Clint Eastwood could sink to something as melodramatic and as plodding as this? A few more drafts of the script and this could have been great, but otherwise, this was a forgettable experience.

THE VERDICT: Nothing really holds the film together, and it suffers from a plodding script that wastes it's good premise. 

What I hoped for:

What I got:

Top 10 critical disappointments of 2010.

2010 has been a year where I went on Rotten Tomatoes, and often found these movies with strangely low ratings which surprised me a little. Well, some, I knew were gonna be bad, but not quite as bad as it's Tomatometer rating said it was...

Please note: This isn't the 'worst films of the year' list. I've barely seen enough 2010 movies to make that list. And also, I haven't seen many of these films, so I'm not judging them on my opinion only, but mainly the critics who savaged them.

10. Love and Other Drugs

44%--It's a pleasure to see Hollywood produce a romance this refreshingly adult, but Love and Other Drugs struggles to find a balance between its disparate plot elements.

I wanna see Love and Other Drugs for a few reasons: Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathaway and Edward Zwick directing a rom-com. Also, this looks pretty different than all the other romantic shit coming out. I mean, this could have easily been awards material, but the critics may suggest otherwise. I guess this won't be so out of the ordinary after all.

9. Due Date

40%--Shamelessly derivative and only sporadically funny, Due Date doesn't live up to the possibilities suggested by its talented director and marvelously mismatched stars.

Okay, so it would have been hard for Todd Phillips to possibly live up to his The Hangover success so soon after it's release. But he could easily have done that with great leads like Robert Downey Jr. and Zach Galifianikis. No such luck though, as some critics have been unashamedly harsh on this film, which leads me to wonder how The Hangover 2 will be.

8. For Colored Girls

32%--Tyler Perry has assembled a fine cast for this adaptation of the 1975 play, and his heart is obviously in the right place, but his fondness for melodrama cheapens a meaningful story.

Remind me never to judge a movie by it's cast or posters again. The cast looks pretty great, and the posters really caught my eye, too. However, by reading some scathing reviews on this one, it looks like Tyler Perry is still incapable of making a good film. And to be perfectly honest, this film just looks like another Precious wannabe.

7. Hereafter

48%--Despite a thought-provoking premise and Clint Eastwood's typical flair as director, Hereafter fails to generate much compelling drama, straddling the line between poignant sentimentality and hokey tedium.

Clint Eastwood is a great director, and Matt Damon is a great actor. The story sounds pretty interesting, too. And hey, it's still out to get Oscars (there are quite a few FYC campaigns for this film on the loose at the moment). It just shows that even the masters can't always make great movies, and Hereafter will probably disappoint. Guess I'll just have to wait and see for myself in February.
(Side note: Is anyone else insanely jealous of Bryce Dallas Howard's hair in that picture? Geez, I want it!)

6. Jonah Hex

13%--Josh Brolin gives it his best shot, but he can't keep the short, unfocused Jonah Hex from collapsing on the screen.

Yeah yeah, it's based on a video game and what not, but I thought Jonah Hex would take. Coz, you know, it has Josh Brolin in it, and he usually picks the right films (apart from that horrid movie W.). It's a western, too, and how often do we see them around? Not often, but when they do come, they are usually pretty good. Oh well, I guess it's just a case of Megan Fox coming to ruin everything.

5. My Soul to Take

9%--Dull, joyless, and formulaic, My Soul to Take suggests writer/director Wes Craven ended his five-year filmmaking hiatus too soon.

I'm not sure that many people saw My Soul to Take, the first film for Wes Craven since the reasonably good Red Eye, and I doubt that we will be getting it here any time soon. It just goes to show that no matter who the director is, a horror movie that is made into 3D for 'extra thrills' will always be a load of crap. And here was me thinking that Wes Craven was better than that.

4. The Bounty Hunter

8%--Gerard Butler and Jennifer Aniston remain as attractive as ever, but The Bounty Hunter's formula script doesn't know what to do with them -- or the audience's attention.

It seems to me that some of the most highly publicized movies (i.e. set pictures arriving in every womans magazine possible) happen to be the most disappointing. That was certainly the case with The Bounty Hunter, which was given so much publicity thanks to the relationship between Aniston and Butler: the two guiltiest parties of bad comedies. I knew it was going to be bad, but I didn't know it was going to be bad enough to garner 8%. After seeing the movie, I can now understand why it deserved that rating.

3. You Again

18%--No consensus.

I don't know what I'm shocked most about: This film passing as a G rated here (I mean, WTF?! Not even a Disney fantasy movie could pass with that rating!), or, that this film only got 18%. Was I the only one that thought the trailer delivered promise? It has Sigourney Weaver and Jamie Lee Curtis in it for Christ's sake! Is there no one who can make a good mainstream comedy these days?

2. Sex and the City 2

16%--Straining under a thin plot stretched to its limit by a bloated running time, Sex and the City 2 adds an unfortunate coda to the long-running HBO series.

I may have been one of the few people who thought the first one was actually pretty good, and one of the few people who thought Sex and the City 2 would get around 50%. Upon seeing the critics savaging and dismissing this film, I was more than surprised. I know that chick flicks aren't usually good, but they usually ain't that bad either. When I saw SATC2, I was less than impressed. It just ruins everything that came before it. Let's hope they don't make another mistake like SATC3. The poor ladies are getting old and too tired to act.

1. The Tourist

20%--The scenery and the stars are undeniably beautiful, but they can't make up for The Tourist's slow, muddled plot, or the lack of chemistry between Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie.

Here is another movie which was heavily publicized, and failed to give. I always knew there was something iffy about it's trailer, but I never expected such a critical uproar over it. If anything, the names Depp and Jolie will sell, but it looks like it was a waste of their talents and the opportunity to have them together in a film. Is it just me, or is Johnny Depp's career rapidly going downhill? Well, it looks like The Tourist might just back that idea up.

Why is NZ getting all these films WAY later than everyone else?

With The Social Network being released this week (YAY!), even though the date was luckily pushed two weeks forward, New Zealand has been waiting quite a long time to see David Fincher's latest. But The Social Network isn't the only one with a delayed release date here. Check out this list:

Splice

USA release date: 4th June 2010. NZ release date: 18th November 2010. Distance between: around 25 weeks.

I think Splice is going into limited release here, but this release date keeps changing. It was first on during the New Zealand film festival in August, and then it was set up for release in September. Now it's going for November, but it's going to be released on DVD in January by Madman, which almost means an instant death in it's DVD release. Was it really that bad?

Machete

USA release date: 3rd September 2010. NZ release date: 25th November 2010. Distance between: 12 weeks.

Though there are several dates flying around for this one, it seems pretty clear that we will be getting this one more than 12 weeks after America. Meanwhile, some cheaters here will probably be downloading this film as I type.

Easy A

USA release date: 17th September 2010. NZ release date: 2nd December 2010. Distance between: 11 weeks.

This one, quite frankly, pisses me off. I really, really, want to see this movie! And by the time I do, everyone else will be like "this is old news!' It's not my fault!

The Kids Are All Right

USA release date: 30th July 2010. NZ release date: 26th December 2010. Distance between: over 21 weeks.

I have always wanted to see this film, mainly because of the amazing cast it seemed to get. However, when I went to the small cinema in the city it had a poster of this, with it's extremely late release date. The unfortunate thing it, this film will go into limited release here, and there's a possibility that we will miss out all together. Which will suck.

Secretariat

USA release date: 8th October 2010. NZ release date: 27th January 2011. Distance between: 16 weeks.

This one is undoubtedly delayed because it's one of those Oscar-bait movies and they always release here in the December-March period.

Hereafter

USA release date: 22nd October 2010. NZ release date: 3rd February 2011. Distance between: 16 weeks.

Despite the fact that it's directed by Clint Eastwood and stars Matt Damon, this film, which wasn't exactly greeted with rave reviews on it's release, won't be making it to NZ shores until next year. Even though there were interviews on the film on one of the chat shows.

127 Hours

USA release date: 5th November 2010 (?). NZ release date: 24th February 2011. Distance between: 16 weeks.

16 weeks until 127 Hours. Believe me, I'm counting down the days already.

Saw 3D

USA release date: 29th October 2010. NZ release date: 3rd March 2011. Distance between: 18 weeks.

Not that I give a shit, but most of the gore loving sadistic minded people who like this over-cooked series of blood will care that they don't get to see the final installment in 'mind-blowing 3D' until March next year. Even I think that's pretty stupid.

Never Let Me Go

USA release date: 15th September 2010. NZ release date: 17th March 2011. Distance between: 26 weeks.

Gosh, now I know that we are 26 weeks behind America in getting to see Never Let Me Go, I am really cheesed off. Yes, of course I want to see it because Andrew Garfield is in it, and the addition of Carey Mulligan and Keira Knightley certainly helps, but the trailer looked so sad and haunting I just can't resist seeing it. And I will still be excited once March rolls around, that's if its limited release ever happens.

Other films which have been released this year in USA, but have an undated release date here for next year:

Catfish

Jack Goes Boating

Stone

The Romantics

You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger

New Zealand may be the most beautiful country to live in, but why do the movie gods continue to give us lousy release dates which are weeks after everyone elses. That's the hardest thing about being in the blogosphere: by the time I see it, it's old news. Mind you, I watch them all on DVD, which I guess is kinda unique in the blogosphere.

Just promise me one thing. When I get to see The Social Network on Thursday (one of the first sessions here in NZ, so I am technically being an early-birdy), don't think I'm slack and think everything I'm saying is old news to you. It's not my fault!