Ever Since the World Ended

ESTWE is presented as a documentary / video diary, interviewing those few people left on earth who didn't die of a plague-like virus. Rather than going the usual sci-fi route and dwelling on apocalyptic scenes, we get interviews with people who have adapted and who are trying to maintain communities and build a future for their children.

The aspects which I found absolutely fascinating are:

The ways in which a community agonises over a dangerous neighbour; some wanting harsh justice, others demanding more humanitarian means but not sure what to do or who has the right to judge..

The children (becoming adults - now in their mid/late teens) who never knew the 'old' world; believing their parents are wrong to try and live in the past, and that they have a purer understanding of how to live in 'their' new world..

The 'human' need for society; those with a need for community/rules/stability; those who prefer to defy convention and live in moderate isolation (a very poignant moment when the beach pot-heads tell us how they've each been planning what the other one should do if he should die); and the lone individuals who worry everyone else and (in a few cases) become quite dangerous.

Within the communities, the very real sense that procreation is something that suddenly needs to be planned properly, and taken very seriously - from a healthy-genetic-pool point of view, as well as very serious medical considerations (in fact, there is a sad moment when you realise that something as simple as a gum-infection could kill you)..

And the idea that the only transportation is by foot, or by bicycle (further isolating communities) - with travellers under threat from lone 'wierdos' who may take pot-shots at anyone coming into their territory..

It should also be noted that apart from (obviously) wondering how you would cope in that situation, you also begin to imagine how much better your quality of life would be without the 21st Century rat-race, 'conveniences' and other distractions. I certainly did.

It's a well made, extremely thought-provoking film (slow at times, but not in a bad way), and really is pure sci-fi.

I would encourage anyone and everyone to see it, in the hope that it will broaden your horizons and make you look at your entire life, relationships and society in a completely different light. I would also put it on school curriculums.

This is a good movie and well made. I appreciate the fact that it is a real sci fi and doesn't rely on high priced effects to get its point across. However... It does bother me that with only 180some people left in a city the size of San Francisco, they have no gasoline to run cars or even motorcycles with. It also bothers me that people protect themselves with an occasional hammer or baseball bat. This seems an affectation of the filmmakers dislike for firearms and unrealistic. Also, the lack of leadership and some sort of coordinated effort to supply the needs of the survivors as well as preserve some of the essentials to prevent the fall back into barbarism is unrealistic. I am a peace-loving old hippie who lives in San Francisco but I am not an idiot, as many of the characters in this film appear to be. I think it says more about San Franciscans from the filmmakers point of view than what would really happen at the end of the world.

I really wanted to like this movie, and I think the concept is a great one. I also think a fair amount of the footage is good, but there were just too many things wrong with it to give an above average rating.

The biggest thing I got out of it was, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Society is supposedly gone, yet these people are still trying to fit into old stereotypical groups. You've got your rationalists, scientists, slackers, conspiracy theorists, the feminist coven, crazy people, violent people, my way or the highway people and just about every other group that exists today. And teenagers still thing they know more then the adults.

I just couldn't buy into it 100% for several reasons. I won't go into some of the massive plot holes (the whole "Mad Mark" story) and just stick to some of the small things. First of all, the Golden Gate Bridge falls apart in 12 years (which I can maybe accept) but everyone is very well groomed, and the women still wear makeup? Not only that but everyone's clothes are in perfect condition. And people still dye their hair? This is really glaring with the character who has been living in the tree tops for several years, by himself, yet he has a perfect haircut, sideburns, a soul patch, but otherwise cleanly shaved? If those kind of things don't bother you, you'll probably like this film much more then I did. It does have potential and I like the documentary style, but there were too many things that didn't seem right too me.

Of course, perhaps the virus that killed most of the people had a weird side effect for the living in that it stopped all hair growth. After all, this is sci-fi.

Not a complete waste of time, but it is flawed.

Nothing great, but this interesting faux documentary of a future 12 years after a virus kills offs most of the population does have some intriguing ideas and is done in total sincerity without an ounce of the silliness that usually accompany films of this nature. It all takes place in San Francisco where there are only 186 people left alive and the most interesting parts to me were the careful and civilized planning of procreation for the future and the opinions of the young who never experienced the world that we know and their ideas and interpretations of just what we were, how we behaved and what we did as a society. The acting is realistic by just about everyone and this is obviously cheaply made, but nevertheless, it is a slightly unusual experience that is helped by its short length.

I teach a upper-level class on The Apocalypse at a Long Island College. This film was one that I chose, first for its brevity--75 minutes--but also for its totally thought-provoking exploration of humanity. Of course, one could quibble over some of the unexplainable aspects--for example, how do most of the characters remain so smartly dressed if there haven't been department stores in 12 years? But overall, it's important to see this film as an allegory, not unlike the Medieval play "Everyman," in which every character represents a "type," a "concept," or an "ideal." The acting is so absolutely natural that the viewer completely forgets that this is a scripted film. More than anything, it raises profound questions about the human condition for days after a viewing--always a good sign. I strongly recommend this film to anyone interested in stretching themselves philosophically. Good story, fine editing, terrific acting.