It’s been over two months since the debut 5 Films About… so, for all of you who’ve been anticipating the follow-up, it has been a long wait. Whether the reason for this elapsed time is purely my laziness, or more to do with a lack of inspiration for subject matter, it’s inexcusable. However, I think it’s best we just put that all behind us now. And so, without further ado, let’s all get excited about – 5 Films About… The Afterlife!

After Life

 Evidently, out of all my selections this was the most aptly named. Whether it’s actually appropriate for this article or not, well, after sitting through it I’m still not sure. The story goes thusly: Socially acceptable drug-addict Christiana Ricci is involved in a car accident, she wakes up in the morgue, overseen by the croc-wearing Liam Neeson. However, his choice of footwear is not the only indicator that something is amiss in this particular house of the dead. Ricci’s first instinct is that Neeson has drugged and kidnapped her, but he informs her that actually she’s dead, and that he has a special gift that allows him to communicate with those leaving the mortal world. Initially, it’s not clear which of these is the truth. By the end of the film, it’s still not clear which of these is the truth. After Life attempts ambiguity, and instead achieves stupidity. Sometimes a film having an uncertain ending can be a good thing, it’s not always necessary to tie up all the loose ends. However, After Life takes a different route, making both of its possible outcomes equally implausible. She’s clearly not dead, but she can’t be alive either – what is she, Mickey Rourke?

I have so many gripes with this film I’m worried that it’s going to take over the entire article, I’ll try to sum them up as quickly as possible. Firstly, I think this may well be the worst cast film of all time: Neeson tries his hardest, but is untenable as the bad guy and Ricci and Justin Long are completely displaced as a middle-class, grown up couple. I mean, just look at them! They look about 16 and I’m talking collectively! I couldn’t stop laughing at the apparently heart-breaking scenes where she pops pills, he drinks straight whiskey (with a grimace on his face) and they have (pre)marital problems. So, add the bad casting to the bland camerawork, the lame special effects, and the fact that the only narrative vehicle is Ricci apparently falling asleep between scenes (i.e. she’s always waking up when something important happens). If I hadn’t have been watching this on my own, in my dark hovel, with only my DVD player to keep me company, I would definitely have considered walking out early.

What Dreams May Come

What Dreams May Come is a hugely mixed bag. The first five minutes of the film play out as a saccharine impression of the perfect American life. Meet in overly romantic and coincidental circumstances, get happily married, have happy kids, live in a happy home and apparently, laugh. Laugh a lot. Laugh to yourself, laugh to your neighbours, laugh with your kids, laugh at your wife, laugh, LAUGH… fucking laugh! Why is everything so goddam funny to you people!

Oh wait, I get it. Every single laugh in the film has been condensed into the first five minutes. I guess they have a humour quota for these kind of family-fun films, and considering What Dreams May Come focuses mainly on tragic death, and takes place largely in Satan’s domain, the rest of the movie is kinda short on rib-ticklers.

The film goes for a more traditional depiction of the after life, with both heaven and hell represented in some shape or form. There’s even an appearance of the ferryman of the Styx, Charon, who’s played by Max von Sydow (“Outstanding defence mechanizms”). Though, probably the best bit of casting in the film is Werner Herzog, credited only as “face”. You’d be forgiven for missing his cameo, which lasts merely a few seconds, but it’s definitely worth watching out for. One of the other stars of the film is the all-dancing, all-naked Cuba Gooding Junior, most famous for that ridiculously exuberant Oscar speech. As far as I can tell he plays the soul of Robin William’s son, who has manifested himself inside Gooding’s body, who in turn has transferred his soul to Von Sydow. Confused? Yeah, me too.

What Dreams May Come isn’t a bad film, and its depiction of the Afterlife is actually rather interesting; managing to be both traditional and original. The film won the 1998 Oscar for visual effects, and you can see why, the depictions of heaven and hell are equally impressive. It’s by no means a classic, but it’s worthy of inclusion in this article.

Hereafter

Clint Eastwood’s Hereafter received a mixed critical reaction when it was released. Roger Ebert gave it a golden four out of four stars, while The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw plumped for a paltry one. I fall somewhere down the middle, believing it’s neither a masterpiece nor a turkey.

Matt Damon is the protagonist: after getting ill as a child, he starts to be able to contact the dead, merely by touching another human. The film’s path draws him to Cecile de’ France (has there ever been a more French name than that?), who plays a woman who has a near-death experience and decides to convince the world that there is an afterlife, and also Frankie McLaren, a young boy who yearns to talk to his twin brother after he is killed by a car.

The truth is, the plot meanders around a lot without ever really feeling substantial. However, there are some excellent set plays (including the opening of the film, which is awesome) and the cinematography on the whole is first rate.

The envisioning of the afterlife is not quite as cool as some of the other chosen films. Basically, everything’s blurry and looks kind of underwater-y. There’s also a big flashy light that doesn’t really look reminiscent of God and some creepy whispering. The crux of the afterlife in Hereafter is what it makes you feel, which is difficult to convey properly in a movie.

Flatliners

In this film, Kiefer Sutherland and Kevin Bacon repeatedly kill themselves and then get their fellow medical students to resuscitate them, with the idea being to experience what lies beyond death.

The depiction of the afterlife in Flatliners is not exactly idealistic. The basic premise is that after seeing the other world your daemons will come back to haunt you. Kiefer Sutherland’s primary daemon is a young boy who possesses the strength of a thirty-year old bodybuilder; that really sucks right? Not only does he continually get the heck kicked out of him, but he also gets embarrassed along the way. To illustrate this point, when his friends ask him how he got the numerous cuts on his face he replies, “some guys… some very big guys.”

One of the film’s other stars, William Baldwin (who is looking more and more like his brother Alec), is haunted by memories of ex-girlfriends whom he videotaped himself having sex with. This manifests itself in television sets, which he can’t even gaze upon without his homemade VHS’ damning him with such slurs as, “you said you loved me Joe!” and “why did you do this to me Joe?” This means he can never revel in the joy of on-screen classics such as Forgetting Sarah Marshall again, a fate surely worth than death. Kevin Bacon and Julia Roberts are also both in the film, neither is at their most glamorous but their acting is decent, maybe aside from Roberts’ awkward crying.

The idea behind Flatliners is decent and the cinematography is, at times, very good. At times it might feel a bit overly-90s, meaning it hasn’t aged particularly well, but if you can see past that this is a pretty enjoyable movie. The depiction of the afterlife is also pretty interesting; perhaps we will have to face the daemons we create in this life, once we pass into the next.

Enter the Void

What on earth can I say about Gaspar Noe’s mind-bending exploration of death and reincarnation? One thing worth noting is that if you choose to enter this particular void, make sure you have a paramedic and psychiatrist on hand, as you’re putting both your mental and physical health on the line. Reviewing the film is tough, but let’s just say that watching it is an experience, an experience that the Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw gave five stars.

The movie is more notable for its ridiculously stylistic camera shots, rather than its depiction of the afterlife, but it’s still a core feature of the film’s fabric. It becomes most prominent towards the end of the picture, when the main character is recycled in a kind of reincarnation-esque sequence. Whether the film’s depiction of the afterlife is merely cinematic, or is actually the heartfelt belief of monsieur Noe, is unclear. However, it’s certainly a pretty cool one, though I hope it doesn’t turn out to be the right one!