Avaliações de usuários

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.

I wasted my time watching this piece and now I'm wasting reviewing. But I feel that people should be warned. If you are ideologically blinded hippie then this movie is for you. Otherwise it is not for you. Simple. It is an incredibly boring ode to hippies' view of the society, their utopian idea how the world would look like if they got rid of the government and the whole mankind. They create a new society filled with "professions" that don't serve any practical purpose, that wouldn't let this society survive for longer than a few weeks. If they're lucky. I don't want to put any spoilers here so I will leave it like that. Be warned though. If you expect some fascinating vision of a post-apocalyptic world - don't get your hopes too high.

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 an interesting experiment, but just an experiment,and in no way ready for prime time. What bothered me most(and there were a lot of things that bothered me) was the absolute failure of imagination. Here, Calum Grant, the writer of this "the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it" scenario, can't let go of the world that has just ended; the survivors (as he imagines them) carry on as if they are in some self-actualization collective. It is SO "west coast" that it becomes a laughable re-affirmation (and this crowd "re-affirms" every five seconds) of every San Francisco stereotype I've ever seen. They don't have to show the Golden Gate bridge, one knows after the first ten minutes of dialogue where this is set. I give credit, as I always do, to the people who had the determination (if not the talent)to get this project off the ground and finished. However, if these yappy, later-day hippies are all that's left of civilization I'd be tempted to shoot myself...no, wait...I'd shoot them first.

"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.

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."

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.

Bad. Bad, bad, bad. I actually discovered new levels of bad while watching this movie. Geez... where to begin...

Let's begin with what this movie is supposed to be about. Some number of years ago the majority of the population of the world was killed off by a plague. Think The Stand, but duller. Apparently, a couple of dudes from San Fransisco decide to wander around and interview the survivors (186 in San Fran to be exact).

Now, I completely understand the low budget thing. But, are we to assume that no news footage of the plague exists to set up the documentary? It would be very easy and inexpensive to stage a fake news report and also, thinking of how an actual documentary would be made it seems like an obvious thing to include. Secondly, the stories being told by the interviewees are so muddled and confusing, that there is really no story to be found. And, I'm being completely serious when I say that I think most of the actors were high as a kite during filming.

Another annoying aspect of this movie was the decisions of what still existed and what didn't. I mean, there appears to be some level of society yet no one has a car? There's electricity and people living in nice homes, but the only person who seems to have a "job" is the local scrounger guy who can "get ya anything ya want." Apparently, the survivors of the plague are perfectly content to not let civilization evolve back to normality. I guess they don't want pot to become illegal again and ruin all their hippy fun. Haha.

The best part of the movie is the ending which takes place at the premier of the documentary in a local theater. How can the premier of your movie be IN your movie??? Gee whiz.

I think my friend put it best... If one of the basic rules of movie-making is "show, don't tell" then this movie showed absolutely nothing, and well... told even less. The only reason to see this movie is to get as high as the filmmakers were during filming with your friends and laugh at how poorly made it is.

The only thing I enjoyed about this movie was the concept. I was hooked by the cover art and the synopsis on the back of the DVD and so I rented it. I was very disappointed in the low budget quality and poor acting. I could have made a better movie using my old mini-DV camera. If "B" quality doesn't bother, perhaps you could get into this. I can think of hundreds of cool ideas to take this idea - the idea that only 180 something people are left on the planet. Think of the infrastructure - buildings, roads....THINGS, you could pillage from billions of abandoned buildings! The film seemed to barely touch on some of the essentials you'd be forced to deal with right away, like how to sustain your food and shelter. Let's hope maybe a bigger studio or something buys the rights to this story.

What I expected from the description? Stories of people surviving in a post-apocalyptical world.

What I got was a bunch of hippies doing nothing to survive, just telling hippie stories and living their hippie lives like nothing happened.

Absolutely waste of time.

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.