Hereafter

Hereafter is a slow, quiet study on the effect that death and the dearly departed have on the living. 

It's not really a ghost story or even a very supernatural movie. The three main characters each have felt death's power in different ways in their life. George (Matt Damon), a man who can contact the deceased, has fled from his abilities because they keep him from having a normal life. Marie (Cecile de France) is a journalist who has a near-death experience during a tsunami, and becomes consumed with understanding what she saw. And in London, a young British boy is desperate to contact a lost family member one last time. 

The three separate stories do eventually connect, but that's not really where the value of Hereafter lies. I can see this film being a source of frustration for some viewers eager for a traditional conflict and resolution or character arc, but those things aren't really Eastwood's priority.The movie doesn't have much of a "point", other than how death is such an important part of all of our lives, even as it's also probably the most mysterious. 

I liked it, but I'm hesitant in recommending it. Slow-paced movies like these need the right audience. It's fairly different from Eastwood's other movies, and I wouldn't mind seeing him tackle something like this, again.

Life after death. Yes. The big question. Here 80 year old maverick Clint Eastwood present us with a cinematic feast without arriving to any final conclusion. How could he? The first quarter of the film is riveting, compelling, jaw dropping. Then, Matt Damon takes over. Let me be clear, I think he is a good, competent actor but I can't, ever, divorce myself from the actor and marry the character. I'm far too aware of his "acting" I have the feeling that Eastwood hires his actor and lets them to their own devices. Sometime that's a good thing but some others, like here and "Changeling" it is clear that more direction of actors was needed. Specially the children. Here as it was the case in "Changeling" the children seem kind of lost. Bryce Dallas Howard makes a bizarre contribution to the film. Unconvincing and down right annoying. And, I must say, I miss opening credits. I hope this fashion ends quickly. The appearance of Martha Keller took me out of the picture. I recognized the face but I couldn't put a name to it. The nagging thought distracted me away from the story. A problem that, with opening credits, could easily have been avoided. I'm rambling. I liked the film and Eastwood should be applauded. Still exploring, still taking risks. Well done!

An emotional film (bring some hankies) exploring the love of children for their mother, the loss of a loved one, and the near-death experiences of the two main characters. The acting is superb, particularly the young McLaren brothers and Cecile DeFrance. I applaud Clint Eastwood for taking this risk and creating a solid piece with riveting emotions and a fantastic conclusion. The only leap of faith that must be taken is the belief that George (Matt Damon) truly has this gift/curse since it is the thread that weaves through all his relationships. This is truly an enjoyable movie and adds to my belief that the greatness of a film is not in the critic's eyes but in your own. This is the second sleeper movie of the week for me. The first one was RED...a great, entertaining movie.

On the way home from seeing this terrific movie, I stopped at a light, a few cars in front waiting to turn right. Around us, the sun had just set, a full white moon was high and the reflections of brake lights bounced off gas stations and car dealerships.

What an amazing world we live in. There is so much in the five miles between my house and the theater where I saw the movie that I could never experience it all. Moments arrive and disappear and the the people shift, move, appear and disappear.

I think most of us need some kind of assurance that it all goes on forever, that our open windows aren't just blacked over and sealed at death.

Clint Eastwood has made a quiet, reflective, thoughtful film on this condition, this need for forever. It's not a flashy paranormal probe of ghosts and goblins, spirits and such.

Taking three central lives we see our need for a hereafter from a French woman who has experienced something before being revived, from a twin boy who has lost his brother and from a lonely man who seems able to capture something from beyond this life. Or perhaps he just captures something from those who come to him.

Cecile De France is stunning as a television reporter who touches her own death and returns. Frankie (or is it George) McLaren is good as the young boy. And Matt Damon's restrained performance is a revelation.

Eastwood has the assured hand that allows long segments in French with English subtitles and a juncture with two disasters and such a touchy-feely subject, and yet it works. Quietly. Thoughtfully.

He also has the good sense to let us draw our own conclusions.

I have respect for Clint Eastwood, both as an actor and a director. Hereafter is not quite among Eastwood's best, but I personally loved it and consider it one of the most underrated movies of 2010-2011. It is beautifully filmed and edited, and Eastwood once again shows what a great director he is. And also as a composer too, Eastwood writes the music here also and with the guitar and piano rhythms it is quite simple but very understated and effective, I found it more memorable than Changeling. The script is thoughtful as well and the characters are interesting enough. I have often heard and seen criticisms of Hereafter being too slow or the story being too ambiguous. I can understand, but I found the slow pace worked, this is a very quiet and reflective film, the pace conveyed this very well. The story is ambiguous, but complex, thought-provoking and moving also. Matt Damon is superb, as is Cecile De France. Bryce Dallas Howard also excels in one of her better performances. Overall, a great movie if not for all perhaps. 9/10 Bethany Cox