Downstream

Absolute dreck. One of the worst movies I've seen this year. Wretched acting, annoying soundtrack, overused end-of-times storyline, and ridiculously jagged editing. I wish I had back the 90 minutes that I wasted watching this crapola. If I ever see the names of directors Simone Bartesaghi & Philip Kim, I'll run in the opposite direction. If you enjoy the after-the-holocaust/bleak-future kind of thing (like I certainly do!), then catch 'Book of Eli' with Denzel Washington & Gary Oldman or 'The Road' with Viggo Mortenson, or for God's sake even the old 'Mad Max' trilogy. 'Downstream' has absolutely nothing going for it in an artistic or entertainment sense. Please don't waste your time on this piece of irritating nonsense.

Since I've made low-budget films myself, I first must say that I am impressed by what Simone put together with Philip Kim's script.

It's a professional product and very nice production value throughout. Especially some of the car-scenes had some complicated and really nice filming. I enjoyed the editing with the German-like experimental split-screen - especially since it was mostly used to tell two sides of the same scene.

Of course, we have seen most of this before. Especially in the MAD MAX-films, of course, but mostly, this film resembles A BOY AND HIS DOG (1975) and there's also a lot of nods to Enzo Castellari's incredible Italian Mad Max-rip off I NUOVI BARBARI (1982).

Downstream IS very Italian. If you haven't seen any of the Italian post-nuke films, then you're missing out on a lot of the films inspiration.

Mostly, I thought this was well-made and for the low budget these people worked with, they created a nice film that works. Sadly, the ending is a bit slow.

Otherwise, the fights and car-action was very good. It reminds me a lot of Marshall's DOOMSDAY (2008), of course - but do remember that that film had a $30M budget and this only a $1M! So if you like the casual Italian post-apocalypse thing, then this is for you.

Many reviews stated to have been 'disappointed' by this film.I wonder what they expected, another nonsense-story of 'big' motives like 'Book of Eli'? This film is realistic to an almost unbearable degree, none of that 'superhero' crap ppl are used to see, none of that 'bible' crap either. What has been falsely called 'civilisation' isn't as solid as it seems, that's where the realism begins, people are NOT 'civilized' most of them act on animal desires, the 'system' manipulates them into a semblance of being civilized..What if all that 'manipulation' collapses due to lack of energy (oil..lol) , is there an alternative energy source? (yes) And will those who use it be of any help to the abandoned masses? The only answer that makes sense is a big NO and they will protect their 'privileged' city like those 'gods' of old protected theirs! Remember Gilgamesh? He had to fight against a 'mechanical-metallic monster' (as he neared the city of gods) that had a 'death ray-sword' attached & revolving, cutting everything down that moved. (thats no sci-fi script but exactly what the Gilgamesh epic tells us) Gilgamesh survived with the help of some gods (his relatives) but the poor Wes didn't, he was shot down by a 'mechanical monster' that patrolled the area around the city. All That makes it apparent that those who wrote the script were more than just realistic; if such a breakdown of everything occurs, those who'd run a 'Cold Fusion-city' would have all that planned for long, & they would keep the outsiders out..& just wait for the masses to exterminate each other or die of diseases.A cancer virus that affects women more is a sure way to keep the population down, by the way thats what the film is hinting at..Population reduction by removing resources and energy & by killing women..The ending was unexpected but adds value to the film, those who expected a 'happy ending' or even a 'helping hand' are..well..unrealistic :) In my opinion one of the best films made in the genre, many don't seem to understand its value because they are used to Hollywood-crap.

I think the movie was trying to tell us something about not wasting energy and conserving a bit more, that's fine. But to do it in this setting, I sorry but it's been done a million times. If you want to make a fictional sorry that conveys a message, use something "in your face" fictional (go see district 9), don't use pseudo-science. I could go on a big rant about what was wrong with the science of the movie, but I don't think this site is the correct forum for that.

In the end, if they would have used some out-of-this-world reason to explain what happens, the movie would have been better. Should you see it, sure, just don't read too much into it. The movie isn't deep and it's not a prophecy of what is to come, although I'm sure there are people out there that will say it is.

Pluses Some of the songs were catchy and overall, the soundtrack matched the film's mood. And the acting was okay, and the Big Chase/Fight sequence was workmanlike. And the opening setup (while the credits were running) was good. Minuses The plot. The ending. The characters.