After Image

if you watch this movie expecting to see a typical Hollywood thriller, you will be disappointed. if you like artful films that don't spoon feed, you'll like "AfterImage" it's a beautifully shot film that betrays its 1.4 million dollar budget. i would like to have seen someone else in the lead (other than mellencamp) though. mellencamp just doesn't have much acting talent or screen presence and he does weigh down the story. terrylene however, is exceptional and someone i could watch all day. she jumps off the screen. billy burke is great and zelnicker's creepy.

manganelli's visuals are pretty impressive. the story's visual narrative tells more than the dialog. it's a poetic film that exploits a certain emotional logic. it stays with you in the way a dream might.

the film isn't for everyone. but neither are some of the films from David lynch, Antonioni, or Cronenberg. manganelli certainly has his signature and i am looking forward to seeing more of his work.

The crime photographer Joe MacCormack (John Mellencamp) is tired of his profession and he quits his job and he visits his Aunt Cora (Louise Fletcher) that has raised his brother and him since they were boys. Joe meets the deaf Laura (Terrylene), who helps his aunt in housekeeping and has premonitions of death, and they feel attracted for each other. Meanwhile a serial-killer is threatening Laura.

"After Image" is a boring movie with messy screenplay, senseless story, nice cinematography and lots of fake reviews promoting it in IMDb. Nothing that happens in this movie is clear. Joe apparently has seen so many murders that he can not bear his profession; or is it a trauma? What is the purpose of his brother in the story? Laura has premonitions and again, no explanations for her ability. Who is the serial-killer and what connection does he have with Joe and Laura. What has happened with the videotape that the killer had sent to Joe and is erased when he goes to the police? In the end, this movie does not explain anything along 92 minutes running time. Before reading any favorable review in IMDb, see the only review of those who are writing to avoid being disappointed like I am. My vote is two.

Title (Brazil): "Visões da Morte" ("Visions of Death")

How is one man's search for inner peace related to a series of violent crimes? That is the premise of "After Image", a lushly visual film that attempts to depict the relationship between what is real, what is tangible to what is unseen, to the spiritual forces that battle against each other for the world, and for the soul.

Kudos to Terrylene for her amazing portrayal as Laura, a woman haunted by visions and dreams connecting her to the killer, the crimes and to Joe. Oscar-worthy work!

Through the use of symbolism, Manganelli portrays Joe as a man haunted by the shadows of the past, hiding in the present behind the lens of a camera. Laura holds the keys to Joe's future by giving him a chance to solve a series of terrible crimes -- as well as the mysteries of his own heart.

A gripping tale by Manganelli. This film is top notch. Riveting and original. I'm looking forward to seeing more of his work! Visually spectacular. Terrylene is wonderful as Laura! She brings a powerful presence to the film. All in all, a must-see movie!

After Image is a movie with a lot of potential, but there is absolutely no clarity in the story whatsoever. John Mellencamp plays Joe McCormack, a photographer who hates his job and quits, but there is no way we understand or even care why or how he got to that point. There is a scene where he throws his camera into the river, with no little scenes building up to that point. No explanation is given for this act, other than a vague response to his Aunt(played by Louise Fletcher), who tells him she thinks he's unhappy. "I'm not unhappy," he says, "To be unhappy you have to care, and I don't care." But why is that?

None of this dialog with his aunt is developed any further, and the only thing that does clarify this is the film's summary on back of the DVD that says that he is "burned out after seeing one too many homicides." Later we see him form a relationship with Laura (played by Terrylene in the film's best performance), but there is very little chemistry, only a connection by the fact that they're both acquainted with Joe's Aunt.

We finally come to the plot (if you call it that) about the killer and the young female victims. We see Laura having visions about the killer and his victims, but how did she get this power? Who is this man? Why is he committing these crimes? What is it the connection between he, Laura and Joe? What in the world is going on here? The story makes no sense and nothing goes together at all. For example Joe's brother Sam, played by Billy Burke, has so little screen time, he is just a distraction. What is he doing in the film?

One scene in particular is a perfect example of the illogical plot and the lack of clarity in the story. For some odd reason, the killer makes a videotape of one of his crimes. It is delivered to Joe with the message "Watch Me." The killer shows his face, and later Joe takes the tape to the police. Miraculously, when he plays the tape for them, there is nothing but static. The film gives no explanation for any of this.

When we get to the ending(which I will not give away), it is neither convincing nor plausible. The killer just happens to show up, spying on Joe, and then the chase begins? Give us a break. With better writing and more clarity, this could have been a great film, with the potential to be even better.

I would recommend that the writers of this movie watch the 1986 thriller, The Bedroom Window, which is as well-written as After Image is badly written. The Bedroom Window was another movie about a male who murders young women, but by the end you know why the events happened, what went on, and why the characters did what they did. This one of those movies where I was hoping to get the answer as to what in the world was going on, in the next scene, and never got it.

On a positive note, Terrylene's performance was splendid, and Mellencamp's was good, too. There were also some good scenes of Rochester, which, hopefully will open some people's eyes who may want to come to Rochester to shoot future films. Movies cannot be entertaining unless the audience either knows what is going or will be able to figure out why or how the events went together by the end of the movie. This one should have been revised by the writers more than once, because the story (or lack thereof) was too cloudy.