Well Deserved Praise

Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

This movie began with some promise as the actors did a good job with what they were given. However, the plot becomes pretty silly over time and the more interesting story was related to the relationship between Ricci and Long's characters. If it focused on them for half of the film, I would have cared more about their outcomes. In addition, they wasted Nissen's talent and he was not the least bit creepy and was not believable at all. Like many modern movies, it lacks heart and character and the writing is poorly done.

Or is it "turbid"? I think in this case, both apply. The pace is nothing short of funereal. What is the underlying theme here? Is it a horror flick? A heavy philosophical treatise on the meaning of life and death? Did anyone really know? It's not clear whether the writer ever had a grip on things and watched it get lost in the film's execution, or whether it remained this muddled at every stage. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when this idea was pitched. How was Liam Neeson corralled into participating in this unfocused mess? It really is, as one reviewer suggested, a episode of Twilight Zone that runs three times normal length and compensates by showing us lots of Ms. Ricci's flesh. She's lovely, but I'm not sure she's worth that extra hour.

As it's own story, I like Agnieszka Wojtowicz-Vosloo's "After.Life". As a movie, not as much. Both Christina Ricci and Liam Neeson put on great performances: her Anna sinks into confusion about her life (or death?), while his Eliot comes across as the typical guy whose nice demeanor might be hiding something. The rest of the cast doesn't equal them, and despite the unique plot, much of the movie seems like stuff that I've seen before.And then there's the cast, or what it implies. Despite Ricci's versatile career, I still remember her as Wednesday Addams. Liam Neeson used to be known for serious roles - Oskar Schindler and Jean Valjean - but now stars in a bunch of dumb action flicks. I don't know if Justin Long has a most famous role, but I always remember him from "Jeepers Creepers". Malachy McCourt is the brother of "Angela's Ashes" author Frank McCourt, and ran for governor of New York on the Green Party ticket in 2006. And then there's Alice Drummond, who's played supporting roles in a variety of movies ("Ghostbusters", "Awakenings", "In & Out", "Doubt", to name just a few).So, it's an OK, not great movie.

After.Life (in case the title didn't give you a clue) is about what happens after death. In this case, Christina Ricci's death. She wakes up in an undertaker's (Liam Neeson) workshop and he informs her she's dead. Of course she naturally points out that she can think, talk and run off, which kind of disproves his theory. So... is he trying to mess with her mind, or can he really talk to the dead? The film is quite static and sticks mainly to the undertaker's home. This lack of movement may have aided its low budget, but can make it feel like the film isn't going anywhere. Plus it is quite long and, in my opinion, that's its major downfall. It's a great premise and all three major players (Ricci, Neeson and Justin Long) play their parts well. It just could be a little tighter here and there.It's hard to say what kind of film After.Life is. It's one part horror, one part supernatural mystery, one part drama and one part thriller. I can see why people don't like it. It can be construed as a little 'all over the place.' I would never say it's perfect, but, if you're in the mood for something that isn't wall to wall action (perhaps Liam Neeson needed something a little 'slower' after Taken 1 and 2!) and more of a slow burner, then you might like After.Life. You'll either love it or hate it.