SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 29th, 2024, 5:24am
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Reviews    Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  ›  After.Life Moderators: Nixon
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 5 Guests

 Pages: 1
Recommend Print
  Author    After.Life  (currently 475 views)
Dreamscale
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 1:56pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



If you haven't heard anything about this movie, you may want to check out Ray's script analysis, which is quite interesting, as it's directed by the writer.

It's a little $4.5 Million budgeted movie with a shockingly strong cast of Christina Ricci, Liam Neeson, and Justin Long.  WWBO was a pathetic $1.2 Million.  Other than the cast, what made this a topic of discussion was the shocking amount of nudity on display from Miss Ricci (she's basically either fully nude or wearing a nightie, the entire movie).

I'm not going to give anything away here, but IMO, it's very obvious that the script worked much better than the film did (and by judging from what Ray posted, the script seemed to be pretty fucking piss poor, in terms of technical stuff).

For me, the movie was extremely dull and "lifeless".  Much of the movie plays out in the same location, scene after scene.  I actually was so bored, that I gave up on it the first night, and had to go back and watch it all over again, the next night.

It plays out like a mystery, but for 1 of the options to be a possibility, a great suspension of disbelief must be present.  In other words, i didn't buy it 1 bit, and because of that, nothing had  much affect on me.

Neeson and Ricci are both as good as they can be with what they were given.  Big props for showing so much skin to Ricci, as her nude scenes had to be uncomfortable.  I didn't buy Long's character or performance.  There is also 1 other pivotal character that I didn't buy at all.

I read up on it on IMDB this morning, and found tons and tons of discussion threads that were actually much more interesting than the movie itself.  Since I watched this streaming on Netflix, I wasn't privy to the DVD special features, in which the writer/director tells exactly what happened and why.  But, based on the discussion threads, of what actually went down, the film really missed its mark, IMO.  Just too ambiguous, too far out, too hard to buy into, IMO.  But, I can actually see where people would be interested in signing on, based on the premise and story.

So, for me, it's just another example of a not so good script that reads well.  A script that looks good on paper, but doesn't transfer to film.

Not a horrible way to spend 90 minutes though.
Logged
e-mail
Brian M
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 2:30pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
Glasgow
Posts
434
Posts Per Day
0.08
This is actually in my top 10 this year, I loved it that much. I like films that make you think after the credits and this was one of those. I do think the ending was a bit too ambiguous and I'm sure people will be divided over what they thought actually happened. For me though, it worked, and I enjoyed this heck of a lot more than I have for 80% of what I have seen in cinemas this year.

Oh, and Neeson was f**king amazing.

I haven't had much time to surf around on here lately. Can someone please point me to Ray's script analysis?  
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 1 - 9
Dreamscale
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 2:42pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



Hey Brian, there are a couple recent threads started by Ray in the Screenwriting Class section.  He has gone over numerous recent scripts in great detail, and it's rather interesting to say the least.

BTW, are you aware of what the writer/director was trying to get across here?  I'm referring to the "was she alive or was she dead debate".
Logged
e-mail Reply: 2 - 9
Brian M
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 2:57pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
Glasgow
Posts
434
Posts Per Day
0.08
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS



I haven't watched the special features either, but when I finished watching, I'm 100% sure she was alive the whole time. I can see why people may think otherwise though. It doesn't matter what theory, alive or dead, there are plot holes for both sides. Very ambigious I think I'll actually head over to IMDB and browse the message board for this and see what the majority agree with. It's definitely a film I'd like to see again at some point.

Thanks re: Ray's threads. I'll be checking them out soon!
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 3 - 9
Dreamscale
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 4:14pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



SPOILERS     SPOILERS     SPOILERS     SPOILERS

Brian, you are correct.  Anna was alive the whole time (unbelievably).  Deacon was a serial killer (for some reason).  The little kid was going to be Deacon's protege going forward.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 4 - 9
goregal
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 5:02pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
9
Posts Per Day
0.00
SPOILERS...

Halfway through I thought it became clear Deacon was a killer, and by the end It was pretty obvious he was a serial killer - wasn't it? He stuck a metal pipe (whatever that thing was?) into her boyfriend’s chest... am I the only one that thinks only murderers do that…


Quoted Text
Oh, and Neeson was f**king amazing.


I second this
Logged
Private Message Reply: 5 - 9
Dreamscale
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 5:18pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



In theory, the boyfriend was actually dead...at least that's what most think on various message boards.  The thing he stuck in him was the embalming device.  If he was still alive, Deacon would have toyed with him like he did everyone else, and then buried them alive.

IMO, it was not obvious at all what was going on.  various things could be taken in various ways, and when you get right down to it, it's completely impossible that this type of scenario would actually play out like this.  If you take into account that he was doing this all the time in this town, it's just way overboard for me.

The only thing that really "shows" his true identity, is when he realized he didn't have his keys, and became panic stricken, and raced back to the funeral home.  But then again, everything was played very ambiguously, so that the audience would think 1 thing and then think another within minutes.

BTW, I didn't really think Liam did that incredible a job here.  he was fine with what he had to work with, but his role was really very 1 dimensional, IMO.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 6 - 9
Brian M
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 5:37pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
Glasgow
Posts
434
Posts Per Day
0.08
MORE SPOILERS...

I thought it was pretty obvious, too, although I was never 100% sure until a few hours after I finished watching. It made me think a lot as there is a lot which suggests that she could be dead. If she is alive, why does she look dead in the mirror? Why doesn't she bleed when he's stitching her up? Why doesn't she feel hungry or need to use the toilet? No food or water all that time? What's with the attempted telephone conversation?

No matter what side you take, there are plot holes. If you think she's dead, what about the breath on the mirror? I could go on. I see that the ambiguity is pi**ing a lot of people off on the IMDB board but I thought it was great. Neeson turned out very much like a Jigsaw from the Saw films, deciding who should live and die based on how much they were really LIVING their lives, I thought that was cool. Some are still convinced she was dead the whole time and Neeson was some sort of grim reaper taking her to the other side.  

I think that the director shouldn't have bothered explaining the film on the special features and just let everyone have there own interpretation. I think it's better that way. I like a film that gets people talking.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 7 - 9
Brian M
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 5:42pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
Glasgow
Posts
434
Posts Per Day
0.08
I'd agree that there's no way this could happen in a town like that. Did you see the number of pictures on his wall of the bodies? Guy's been busy, that's for sure. They would also be suspicious of the amount of "crashes" in the area resulting in dead bodies.


Quoted from Dreamscale
But then again, everything was played very ambiguously, so that the audience would think 1 thing and then think another within minutes.


I do remember when the boy saw Ricci's character at the window, I was sure she was alive, then minutes later, they had me convinced that the boy could see dead people too.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 8 - 9
goregal
Posted: December 10th, 2010, 6:12pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
9
Posts Per Day
0.00
Hah…ok I was being brief. – I shouldn’t have said “clear,” I meant “to me.”
I agree that it’s intentionally ambiguous whether he’s a killer or not, but I guess it depends how you interpret what was happening…that’s what’s good about the film.
IMO it almost seemed like the ending with Paul was thrown in for good measure just to leave me more confused…without it there would have been little(er) argument?

There definitely are plot holes either way, but I wouldn’t say eating and using the toilet are some of them. If a dude had me locked up, freezing, naked, surrounded by dead people in his basement, they would probably be the last worries on my mind …

I really like Liam, so I guess I’m biased. He did a great job. I couldn’t get his pissing and shit line out of my head.


Quoted Text
I do remember when the boy saw Ricci's character at the window, I was sure she was alive, then minutes later, they had me convinced that the boy could see dead people too.


Same. But when he buried that live chick? To me, I went –yep, impressionable young boy being made gaga by sicko grim reaper.
Pretty good movie. Slow, but good.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 9 - 9
 Pages: 1
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006