Ever Since the World Ended

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.

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.

"Ever Since the World Ended" doesn't illuminate itself with flashing bulbs and overly artistic camera work, nor does the film degrade itself by venturing into the over-dramatic and quasi-philosophic. Rather, the movie succeeds at what it intends to be: realistic.

The comparison between older characters longing for the pre-plague past and younger characters acknowledging cynicism for the materialistic life we find ourselves in now provides an interesting scenario in itself. Where the film truly shines is during the small and almost subtle moments of humanity: shots of San Francisco completely devoid of activity and life. Simple footage of an area known for its population suddenly vacant make for simple yet profound imagery; to actually imagine such a transformation is, in itself, rather difficult.

Additionally, any viewer with any sort of historic appreciation can participate in the following scenario: Even now, people marvel at the innovations, art, engineering and lifestyles of ancient civilizations. Perhaps inadvertently, "Ever Since the World Ended" sets its future generations up with this scenario. What existed before was a civilization of skyscrapers and vivid imagery; what exists now (in the film) is a world of close-knit personalization and a general worldly-innocence. Although generations immediately following the events in the film would probably not 'appreciate' (for lack of a better term), the past that was, the generations in the future conceivably would (like we do today with the Greeks, Egyptians, and so on).

Although this movie lacks a certain flash that certain film-goers demand, it still provides an interesting view into the hypothetical future of mankind. Post-apocalyptical stories may not be uncommon, but certain stories seem more tangible than others; this is one of them.

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.

The premise for this film is great: What would it be like to be part of a community of fewer than 200 people inhabiting the deserted remains of San Fransisco some years after a global pandemic? Unfortunately, the film totally fails to deliver on the premise. In such a world, one would expect the commonplace and the catastrophic to coexist, as they do in this film; it's just that the commonplace would almost certainly be nothing like that depicted here. The filmmakers seem to think that 12 years after the loss of 99% of the human population, a major city would somehow be magically preserved intact and undamaged, just as if it really were a quiet Sunday morning, which is presumably when some of the establishing shots were taken. More likely, San Francisco and practically every other city or town would be a burned-out ruin. The survivors' struggles would be quite different and much more in deadly earnest than is shown here. Anyone who is more interested in my extrapolation of what life would be like 12 years "since the world ended" may refer to my post in the message boards, since that would be too long to post here and since most of the other reviewers have contributed their quite legitimate surmises about how this imagined world really should look. If you're a first-year film-school student, this endeavor might be an interesting subject for critique; otherwise, stick with "The Road Warrior."