Aftermath

I first saw this film in 1998 at a film festival in London, and being able to see it on the big screen only added to the experience of seeing it. It begins as a routine autopsy, and you feel a sense of pathos as you follow the procedure, but then the whole thing becomes a little more uncomfortable, and it speaks volumes for the director that he can increase the suspense so subtly. The gore is very well done, and the ending is a masterpiece of queasy endings. The funny thing is, Nacho Cerda is one of the most well-adjusted people I've met, and it's incredible to think that something like this came out of his head. It's a short that is well worth seeing, but be prepared to be disturbed by it.

What happens when you die? What was the first thing you thought of when you read that question? Most people would immediately think about whether there is a Heaven or Hell. "Aftermath", the controversial 30 minute short from Spanish director Nacho Cerdà takes a look at (in graphic detail) what happens to the body after death. This powerful film is not for the easily offended or those with a weak stomach. There is no dialogue and primarily takes place in an actual morgue. "Aftermath" will make you question how you want your body handled after death and it will open your eyes to the horror that is present in the world. Cerdà decided to make a film that covered both issues when I suppose he could have stuck to one. Although this is only 30 minutes, after the second act you will feel as if you have been watching for hours. That is if you make it to the second act. Make no mistake, this is 30 minutes of the raw, uncompromising reality of Autopsy's.

That being said...there are some things you should keep in mind while watching in order to understand, respect and ultimately enjoy what Nacho Cerdà has put together. You have to take into account the cinematography, the fact there is no spoken dialogue, the soundtrack and the moral questions it brings out of you. Cerdà did an AMAZING job with the filming using slow moving camera work mixed with an eerie classical soundtrack. Speaking of sound, the sound effects were that of a big budget film. The clarity and realness was nearly more disgusting and frightening than the action on screen. I cringed more from the sound than the visuals at times.

This film makes the viewer think about what happens after death. Most people may think their soul leaves them and their "temple" aka body gets laid quietly to rest. They don't think about what goes on between the time of passing and when the body is six feet under or cremated. They certainly don't think about how the autopsy will go or what will happen with their organs if they are an organ donor. The first person doing the autopsy seems to have no care in the world for the body he is mutilating; however, you later realize that he is just trying to do his job (quickly) and get out. I would be the same way. Wouldn't you? Then you're left to realize the second character, meticulously played by Pep Tosar, is really the sicko. This movie may be a lot more than most people can handle, but if you can put aside the "shock" of seeing a graphic autopsy and sickening necrophilia what you are left with is an important film that begs the viewer to confront their thoughts of what happens after you die. A powerful film.

http://cinemapat.blogspot.com/2010/10/aftermath-nacho-cerda-1994.html

This really isn't a movie. Hell, there really isn't even a story (nor is there talking). It's just some shock content and an overly long opening credits (around 5 minutes, which is absurd for a 30 minute film). While it's not exactly art it's definitely different. The film concerns a morgue where some morticians are doing autopsies. Later, one of the morticians proceeds to violate a female corpse while he's alone. The film features full-body nudity although I'm not sure if the bodies were fakes, real corpses donated to "the arts", or actors with prosthetic effects. Either way you see full-bodied nudity (both genders).

There's a weirdness to the whole thing. The scene with the morticians just going over their bodies is somewhat surreal. There's a bizarre character development that takes place despite the lack of speech and most of the mortician's face being obscured. His eyes convey his bizarre curiosity as he examines one of the men's naked frames, seemingly stopping on the genitalia. Later on when he starts with the female he seems to gingerly cut free her clothes. He plays with his blade delicately against her skin... then he guts her open. And a little after that the film really starts to get graphic, although I will say that he only uses one hand to examine her... There's a definite progression to the depravity.

It's a film that I wouldn't really think I'd be interested in but there was a certain oddity to this premise. And while the initial legitimate autopsies were harder for me to watch, a morbid curiosity better kept my attention for the second half especially since it was almost downright funny in places. I'm honestly not sure what they were going for with this, though. It's short, it's a little weird, but mostly it's just pointless. All the same it's really not bad and somehow has a strange charm to it. Ultimately it's more silly than disturbing, almost like an angsty teen's attempt to be edgy.

Oft lamented gore short in the same vein as 'Necromantik', though arguably a superior product.

A coroner performers his daily duties of managing the dead, but when the day ends and all others go home the dead are his to do what he pleases.

Timeing in at a mere 30 minutes and lacking any spoken dialogue, the film is very short on story. Aside form a couple quick bits out side of the operating room, the film doesn't concern itself with story details; it already knows exactly what it wants to show you. That being the graphic dismemberment and eventual sexual desecration of the dead. Showing as much of the process as the (very convincing) corpse effects will allow, hardly a detail is spared from view.

The coup de grace is, of course, meant to be the ultimate act of intercourse with a gutted out body, yet that was not the scene that affected me the most. A different scene involving a more real-world process of preparing a cadaver was (to my mind) more disturbing. It was so simple, by the numbers and unemotional, and no matter what I will be there someday.

Technically the film is outstanding. Effective camera use, perfect lighting, and a great use of both music and excellent sound effects. It could be argued that the film needs something resembling a story to further flesh out, and I would both agree and argue against it. Without a deeper story, the gory visuals do lose some emotional impact, but adding to much more would have thrown off the pace and dulled the impact of the film.

Definitely shocking, undeniably well made, but to simple to garner more than a curiosity viewing. Genre fans only please.

8/10

This short film presents in graphic detail the dirty little secret of funeral services. All too often, bodies are mutilated and raped. Karen Greenlee was jailed and became nationally famous for her rampant necrophilia in the 80s. Here, Nacho Cerda presents this topic with a great attention to detail and no sensationalism. The mortician fondles, mutilates, and rapes a corpse after the viewer witnesses a very accurate autopsy. The mortician takes home some souvenirs, pictures for himself and a heart for his dog. That's it, no distractions from the reality of the subject matter. It's not filmed in such a way as to shock the viewer but to present unapologetically the very sickening reality that things like this happen more often than we'd like to believe. The realism is the most disturbing part.